Chapter I. Last week at the Avraham Burg forum at the NY Public Library, Omer Bartov slapped Burg on the wrist for using Nazi analogies in criticizing Israeli behavior. Said he went too far. Then Bartov, a scholar of Nazism, with a faint smile aimed at defusing the hypocrisy, promptly described the time he himself used a Nazi analogy, when he wrote to then-Defense Minister Yitzhak Rabin 20 years ago to say that Israeli soldiers throwing a Palestinian boy from a Jeep was the sort of brutalized behavior he had studied in Nazi Germany. (Well, it just goes on, doesn't it?)
Chapter II. A few weeks ago I got a lightning-bolt email from Virginia Reath. She's an artist friend who "gets" me (we basically share a ton of values) and from time to time she grabs my lapels. "I just saw an Israeli film called Waltz with Bashir. You absolutely have to see it! let me know i want to see it again. finally a film that demands the end of innocence !!!!!!!" I learned that the film involves the 1982 invasion of Lebanon, but I didn't see it...
Chapter III. Two days ago I got a similar email from a guy in England with dual English/American citizenship, who's lived in the U.S. too. Requesting anonymity, he told me why the film is so important:
It is a great film on many levels. It's a great animation and a great war film (which is an unusual combination) and is interesting in its own right, but I think it also perfectly illustrates the point that Israelis don't seem to have a problem with self-criticism. There are several explicit comparisons made by Israelis in the film between events in Beirut in 1982 and Nazi behaviour in WWII.
Interestingly, this made me feel much more sympathetic to the Israelis than any amount of distorted, one-sided history that I used to listen to from people in the States: people who were intelligent, well educated, and far to the left of me on every other issue. [Weiss emphasis thruout]
While it deals unflinchingly with the Sabra and Shatila massacres and the Israeli role in the them (and probably in fact because of this) I felt sympathetic towards the Israeli characters. They were trying to deal honestly with a dark part of their own and their country's past (the main character has actually lost his memory of the events and is trying work out what he can't remember and why). It was also interesting seeing a whole film in Hebrew. I have never really listened to the language and I found it fascinating. There are Hebrew rock songs in it (which I presume date from the Lebanon war) with lyrics like "we bombed Beirut today, we bomb it every day". The darker and more Vietnam-like it became the more I felt the "they're people like us" idea which I always think is the subtext of the "shared values" Israeli lobby argument. Normally I wouldn't feel that way, in fact quite the opposite, because I would feel like I was being fed propaganda.
Wow. From which I conclude that: The whole world knows that Israel is conducting atrocities. Israel itself knows this. We deny it here, deny it deny it deny it. Dershowitz and Peretz, both 70 years old and blowing out the moral lights. But allowing smart people to talk about these things openly, using any historical analogy they frikkin please, is liberating intellectually and may actually serve Israel, just when it's slidin off the brink...
Sounds like a successful piece of propaganda. Do the Nazis just suffer from bad public relations? I'm sure Hollywood will get to work on that right away!
Israel's very own Apocalypse Now … Waltz with Bashir
Oh, Bartov again, what a scumbag.
http://www.anti-rev.org/textes/Bartov00a/index.html
Bartov review of Finkelstein's Holocaust Industry, one the nastiest smears ever written: notice how Bartov accuses NF of deigning to acknowledge the existence of the Holocuast, as if he would prefer not to–since his parents were in concentration camps. One of the nastiest comment ever.
http://www.jewishworldreview.com/people/hitlers_second_book.php3
To quote Bartov from this link, an article in TNR:
"For one of the most frightening aspects of Hitler's book is not that he said what he said at the time, but that much of what he said can be found today in innumerable places: on Internet sites, propaganda brochures, political speeches, protest placards, academic publications, religious sermons, you name it."
"Hitler is dead, but there is a Hitlerite quality to the new anti-Semitism, which now legitimizes not only opposition to Zionism but also the resurrection of the myth of Jewish world domination. And those who foolishly think that doing away with Israel, not least in a "one-state solution," would remove anti-Semitism had better look more closely at the language of these enemies. For they–I mean the enemies–insist that the Jews are everywhere, and so they must be uprooted everywhere. Their outpost may be Israel, but their "power center" is in America, and their synagogues and intellectuals are in Germany and France, and their academics are in Russia and Britain. Since they are the cause of all evil and misfortune, the world will be a happier place without them, whether it is dominated by the Aryan Master Race or by the ideological soldiers of the Muslim Brotherhood."
Please somebody tell me whether somebody who writes this should have any credibility whatsoever on this blog.
As Finkelstein once wrote me, Bartov is a "repellent gasbag." He will play the anti-semitism card in a blatant way, and then criticzie Hitler analogies from anti-Zionists. Bartov is motivated primarily by a self-serving hatred of the genuine left–what else would he be doing writing for Peretz and TNR rag?
His reputation as a Holocaust historian is based on writing the same book three times. His concept of "industrial killing" is hardly a searing insight. He's a product of the Holocaust Industry himself. Without it, he has to be a real historian to get a job, instead of indulging himself in boring Israelil film criticism. He's a piece of work.
Well I have heard it all now.
We are suppose to feel sympathy for Israelis because they are suffering from their nazis behavior?
Their little psyches are hurting from the brutality they commit?
Dear gawd!…can anything be more revealing about the nature of the zionist/Jews and Israelis than this?
Let us weep for the serial killer moaning over the tummy ache he got from eatiing his victims.
Jesus fricking christ.
Poster who call himself "American" – Why don't you just go over/back to StormFront.org and spare us your obtuse insights on jews and other things.
If you are a real American I am Sharon in a coma.
As for StormFront I have never been there, nazis of any type,jewish or gentile, aren't my thing, but it's obvious those kind of gangs bother you.
Probably for good reason. The Lukids zionist vrs.the neo-nazi Skinheads…coming soon to a theater near you. Ideally you will wipe each other out.
A prime example of the psychosis-inducing lie: conflating the left with Nazis, than whom no one is more right-wingie.
The two thoughts, diametrically opposed, clash inside the skull and turn the brain to mush.
Gilad Atzmon has an interesting discussion of Waltzing with Bashir.
Kurt Vonnegut once referred something similar. He said the best short short story he never wrote was called something like "Nazi Psychiatrist." Concentration camp personnel would come to the doctor and say they felt guilt and remorse for the horrible things they were doing and seeing and the psychiatrist would tell them that it is normal to feel that way but to remember they are doing a great service for the Reich and to go back and continue to do their jobs with the knowledge that it is all for the greater good.
When you look at the dissent of the commenters here. And many are Jewish, that is an important point for a racist empire. And anyway dissenters of Israeli actions are growing exponentially. And you consider the openness of speculating of a civil war by Israelis, granted it is from time to time. Why can't there be a Jews not for the empire movement. Secular non racist Jews, of which there are millions, who simply bury their head in the sand, out of fear. How about a movement for Jews against False Flags, or Jews against militarism, or Jews against Neocon zionist dictatorship. An intellectual civil war is needed. One that really questions the atrocities being commited by Israelis and Jews. Now the power structure has an ideological stranglehold, and it's headed for a big war. Expect more big terrorist acts, that'll keep the loyalty and the hatred afloat. There actually could be some sort of way out, in the guise of a person or movement.
The question is not whether making analogies between the polices and/or behaviour of Israel and Nazi Germany "helps" Israel,but rather: "Are such analogies true"..
and,are they being resisted because they are false,or because they "hurt Israel",meaning:
they undermine the zionist myth of Israel as the perpetual victim….
I disagree. The question of whether 'analogies' are 'true' already betrays its own excessive demands on discourse. The idea that Nazi Germany constitutes a paradigm or Ideal Type of 'Evil' underlies the effort behind these rhetorical 'analogies', whichever 'side' they purport to be on. It is however necessary to de-throne the Nazi régime from this Ideal Type status, and indeed to avoid such Ideal Types altogether, since they have no basis in reality and really only serve as a focus of conceptual idolatry.
I have read the hallow commentary here. Firstly, why is it the new left which resembles the old left equates all of their enemies as Nazis? So Israel is a Nazi regime or neoconservatives are Nazis or Dershowitz defends the Israeli nazi regime. Secondly why is it the left glosses over the minutia and detail of history to jump to a general hypothesis without any detail: ie: "we all know that Israel is committing atrocities". Yah right, of course they are. Lets avoid the particulars though.
Waltzing with Brashir is not such a unique film for Israel. You see, Israelis constantly question policies, navel gaze and question procedures. It is a truelly democratic society. Waltzing criticizes the actions in Lebanon. Many in Israel did. The war in Lebanon was a war and by definition there were problems. There is not a war where there arent issues and debates. I know an Israeli soldier who was in Lebanon, from Canada, who hated Israeli pilots. Why because his half-track APC was mistaken by the Israeli Air force as the enemy and was destroyed with his men in it—Friendly Fire. Atrocities happen in War, the USA bombed cities in Germany, the allies decided not to bomb any of the death camps, Russians treated their own civilians poorly in Stalingrad, the USA in Mai Lai, the list is endless. But we dont condemn the whole country because there were crimes committed. But the truelly democratic and moral countries recognize the atrocities in the heat of battle and try to rectify the policy that created the moral wrong.
Israel faces those criticisms and deals with them, through the courts, the newspapers, the arts and politics. It does not ignore its own weaknesses it faces them and deals with them. Nazi Germany in contrast never felt it did anything wrong and felt it was doing the right thing.
Israel is surrounded by foes who are viscous in their hatred of Jews. They actively promote Nazi propaganda. They believe it is right. Hamas today in a public rally taunted and laughed at the parents of the kidnapped Israeli soldier held by Hamas. This was the same rally where they said, all Jews must be killed where ever they reside. Pamphlets were handed out praising the murders of Jewish children in a day school in Maalot in the 80s and Jewish students in a seminary last year. So by definition who is the Nazi, the ones who praise and espouze Nazi ideals or the country that is sitting in the middle of all this hatred who has been on a constant war footing and faces its foibles and tries to rectify them?
Waltzing is just one of those films. There are those who would say it is not correct on its facts (much the same way that JFK plays loose with the facts) but that doesnt make it wrong. Israel did not ban the movie. If it was an Iranian film critical of Iran there would be a fatwa ordering the death of the makers. In contrast Israelis discuss the film and things change if the population agrees that there should be change–very democratic. Israelis arent looking for sympathy, the film is for Israelis not you guys. If it was for you guys it would have been in English. They do want respect though. They want you to respect that is trying to deal with things: they dont want their kids in the army they want them to be doctors and lawyers; they accept Arabs into the Army such as Druse Bedouin and circassians; they have affirmative action programs, but it is a very young country and it will make mistakes, afterall what country in its history has not made mistakes—none. Just dont condemn the entire country and its people because it represents something that is against your idealogical dogmatic paradigm.
The Deer Hunter, Platoon, and Apocalypse Now are great, classic films, although all of them lack the historical context. of the Vietnam war. I see Waltz with Bashir the same way. It's not incumbent on an Israeli filmmaker to give us history lessons just because he/she is Israeli, particularly in a 90 minute film. There are plenty of websites on the conflict to give any curious person a balanced perspective of what's going on. I recently saw a Chinese film about poachers in Tibet,and certainly didn't expect a history lesson. I've read lots of criticism about this film, but Waltz is subject to interpretation like any work of art. Contrary to many of the critics, I saw the film as a total admission of Israeli guilt for Sabra and Shatila. Israeli soldiers had at least some idea of what was going on in the refugee camps but lit up the night sky with flares and otherwise failed to act on this knowledge. Secondly, the last scene shows the narrator guarding the exit to the camp, implying the responsibility of complicity.