I think we are in the beginning of an American Jewish backlash against Israel. The causes of this anger are obvious: Gaza and Avigdor Lieberman are
resonating through a Jewish community that voted for Barack Hussein
Obama, 4 to 1.
Years ago Tony Judt wrote presciently in Haaretz that Israel was like an adolescent out of control, and the U.S. was the parent, and the relationship was coming to an end. Judt was right. That relationship is coming to an end. And what do parents who have enabled a juvenile delinquent do? Well one thing they do is get very angry.
Here are signs of the fury:
–Michelle Goldberg, who is no voice in the wilderness, speaks at the 92d Street Y and in an interview with TPM's news editor Justin Elliott expresses real anger with the Israel lobby. She says it is defending the indefensible. And it is reduced by the poverty of its position to hysterical attacks (what Mearsheimer has called "smashmouth attacks"). She is also really down on Lieberman. Unlike other American Jewish reporters, Goldberg honorably refused to to carry any water for Lieberman.
–There is no other way to interpret Roger Cohen's remarkable series of columns in the Times on Iran & Israel than in this manner: Cohen (again, no voice in the wilderness; he is a former Foreign Editor of the Times) has woken to Israel's true nature–militant, deluded–and is using everything in his power to change American establishment (Jewish) opinion. I bet if you were having a beer with Cohen, he would express cold fury toward Israel along these lines: We gave that country a blank check, that is over…
–Both Cohen and Goldberg might be said to be following the path of Henry Siegman, a former guardian of Israel who today publishes a piece in the Guardian
titled "Netanyahu's False Promises." The piece is charged with the feeling of betrayal. He calls out
Netanyahu/Israel as the real obstacle to peace.
–Yesterday a Jewish friend sent me and Richard Silverstein an ADL email titled, "How
Dangerous is the Threat? 'Go Back to the Ovens,'" quoting an aberrant expression of anti-Semitism at some rally about Gaza. The email goes on: "Jews here and around
the world have experienced the ugliest backlash of blatant
anti-Semitism many of us have witnessed in our lifetime."
The friend
wrote, "I wish this was some kind of terrible joke, but it's not." Silverstein echoed that point in his response: "Isn’t it a tad curious that Israel kills 1,400
Gazans in a crazy ass war and all of a sudden WE are the victims??!!" Rage.
–Dana Goldstein's piece at American Prospect yesterday is what prompted me to write this post. In it, she bluntly and helpfully calls Lieberman "a racist." Now just think of all the Washington Post and New York Times reporters stepping on tiptoes around Lieberman's uncomfortable opinions; but god bless her, Goldstein says, he's a racist. She goes on:
[He] has
said, "Minorities are the biggest problem in the world." American Jews,
many of whom feel their own minority status keenly, ought to have a
great number of questions about how this regime came to power, and
whether we are comfortable with its politics representing us on the
world stage.
The entire thrust of Goldstein's piece is: In Jewish life we are supposed to extol Israel. Well guess what, our Diaspora is a lot better than Israel when it comes to minority rights. We have lived as a minority in the west for centuries. You are really blowing it as a majority in Israel/Palestine.
For years you have seen signs at non-Zionist Jewish events: Not in our name! This attitude used to be fairly marginal. I'm saying that a lot of Jews around the country now share that feeling and are beginning to express it. Many of these Jews probably think of themselves as Siegman once did, as a guardian of Israel (Michelle Goldberg, then serving the Israel lobby, attacked Walt and Mearsheimer three years ago). The guardians are allowing themselves to express these feelings because they don't think they will kill Israel by doing so or, more pertinently, they think Israel is doing a fine job of killing itself and they will no longer be a party to the process. Stay tuned.
The essays by Dana Goldstein and Morton Zuckerman reflect the growing gap between younger and older Jewish generations in how they view Israel. Goldstein says Israel should be judged by its actions, just like any another state. Zuckerman defends the status quo, the indefensible. Goldstein represents the future; Zuckerman the slowly fading past. But Zuckerman has the wealth and ownership of two MSM outlets. There are many other media barons like Zuckerman, and they will never allow a piece of writing like Goldstein's to see print in their media. Fortunately, they don't have a monopoly on media ownership in this country. Thank God for the Internet.
The tide is indeed turning in the US, and Jewish thought leaders like Roger Cohen and Joe Klein, to name just two, have finally said Enough! with make believe politics when it comes to Israel, and have refused to be intimidated by the Lobby. What we have, in a deliciously ironic way, is an "intifada", a shaking off, of Lobby threats that have successfully muzzled the vast majority of journalists from writing the truth about Israel for decades.
Hats off to you, Phil, for bravely cutting through the jungle of lies and misinformation about Israel so others could more easily follow. You paid, and continue to pay the price, but I hope you feel it was worth it.
There may be a few Jews that are furious at Israel, but not enough. Not nearly enough. And if you read the comments at Haaretz or worse, JPost, you see where the heart of the Jewish people is on Israel.
I applaud anyone who speaks out for justice, but I'm unsure which of the above mentioned people are truly angered at the injustice suffered by Palestine and how many simply wished the never ending sham of a 'peace process' had continued indefinitely under Tzipi Livni?
Had she become PM, the only difference wold be the sham would have a few more breaths of life. Lieberman is not the problem, he is only a more obvious symptom that many, who were quite comfortable with the disease, had hoped not to see.
Great post, Phil. And I concur with seethelight about " bravely cutting through the jungle of lies and misinformation about Israel so others could more easily follow."
Let us hope…time will tell. And not to rain on your parade here Phil, but I think what Dana is really expressing is that she is finding out Jews are just like all other peoples. When they are in power they are as oppressive as others. There is nothing special or chosen about Jews, not even their thinking it so.
"[He] has said, "Minorities are the biggest problem in the world." American Jews, many of whom feel their own minority status keenly, ought to have a great number of questions about how this regime came to power, and whether we are comfortable with its politics representing us on the world stage."
Am I reading this right? Is Goldberg an American? If Goldberg isn't an Israeli, his attitude is the problem! Israel represents American Jews on the world stage? I wonder if the American Jewish backlash against Isreal will be accompanied by an American backlash aainst Jews who supported Israel and rammed it down our throats? I wonder if many Jews even think it would be fair that the rest of us judge them?
I have a hard time calling "former Zionists" courageous because they are sarting to quibble on the issue of Isreal. The problem is bigger than Israel, and these people seem to be engaged in damage control.
Good point Todd. I let myself get carried away with Phil's initial spin. (Momentary weakness :)
A more mature approach to Silverstein's would be to honor the threats to ALL civilians, Palestinian and Israeli, rather than play "you started it".
Laurie,
It's funny that the same people who toss away my citizenship over dinner would also view Israel as representing them on the "world stage."
RE: "…she is finding out Jews are just like all other peoples. When they are in power they are as oppressive as others. There is nothing special or chosen about Jews, not even their thinking it so."
This is what Truman said–at least. And without him, would there be an Israeli state today? You can go to the Truman Library archives for his exact words–he was really pissed. But like all US politicians, he had to organized domestic zionist jewry. Even back then, his chances of beating
Dewey were slim without their money and NY votes and MSM dominance. Nothing has changed.
What the heck is Witty saying now? Can anybody be more off point? Man, he's squirrelly. Take a look at his posts today on the various threads off Phil's articles. The guy is having a mental breakdown.
hey hey hey…woah woah!!!!!! easy there, observer!!
Didn't you get Phil's memo?
If you don't have anything sweet to say about Witty's well-mannered pleas for ethnic cleansing, you're not a nice person.
Now apologize!
Better that they be effective at facilitating change, than by being furious.
Maybe outrage is the first step towards that effectiveness. Maybe its more self-talk.
Its similar to maturing the way one deals with fear. Fear is at best information. I know many new-age folks that regard fear as repugnant (its certainly unpleasant), and prefer a "miracles" approach.
I think that fear is information, to assess, and act on if CHOSEN to.
I prefer not to steal another's fear, as many activists have argued that they don't want others to steal their anger, their outrage.
If we are having to decide this time around if something or other or if not. Besides which, I have often been a victim of anti-semitism. Why just the other day, I was rummaging around in my trunk when a fellow… Wait. What was I saying? Ah yes! The settlements. Well, if you have a house and it's blown up by Jews, you can just get another one in Jordan or you could think nice thoughts and that will often make you feel better. My wife complains about the poor ventilation in our ranch home. The seder was magnificent, even if we had to conduct the whole thing in navaho this year. STOP BEING MAD everyone! It's immature. How can we know what happened in 1948? We still don't understand electricity! My goodness, why are people attacking me? Hillel are wonderful people. They helped us when the air conditioning went out. Oh GOD oh GOD oh GOD…HAMAS IS GOING TO DESTROY THE ENTIRE EARTH.
Thank you for reading my post.
..Richard Witty
Phil:
Whatever happened to your posting guidelines? Is rykart adhering to them?
In any event, Iraq Comes Home is going to look more and more outdated as a title for the blog. Iraq is Obama's war now, and in any event we're winning it. President Obama will never again say it was a mistake–just watch
So, here's a good suggestion for a title. Mondoweiss–Stamping our Little Feet in Anger and Joy.
Posted by: rykart | April 15, 2009 at 05:58 PM
ROTFLMAO!
That made me laugh so hard I almost fell out of my chair.
Rykart,
I'm sorry that you are confused by my posts.
Perhaps you can ask what I mean if you don't understand my point, rather than attempt to humiliate.
Witty, I detest gang-flaming, and I admire your refusal to be baited or chased off.
Though I have to admit that while rykart is discourteous, he is a skillful satirist. I don't think he is trying to humiliate you, but rather trying to use humour to illustrate why he finds your posts frustrating.
My problem with your posts is that they do seem full of vague passive-voice sentences and odd non-sequiters. For example, you keep urging a resolution of land ownership through the courts, which seems to be like telling American Indians forced into reservations in the 19th century that they just need to bring their problem up with the US courts, or that a Gazan whose house is bombed should call 911, make an insurance claim, and write a balanced, thoughtful letter to the editor of the local paper.
I can tell you are deeply troubled by this situation, but I think people get frustrated with you because your posts often don't seem connected to the discussion.
Rykart is just a garden variety antisemite who gets his information from stormfront and others of that ilk. Nothing skillful about him.
As for your analogy, it only works in the 19th century, today there are just courts.
But lob a missle and you've lost your rights to those courts.
David F,
I've stated a dozen times, that I am responding to Phil's and Adam's posts primarily. That is the purpose of the comments section, to comment.
When there is comment that actually is a discussion by others, I'll dialog. When the comment is invective, I'll usually not. When the comment is malevolently misrepresentative "satire", then I also am moved to clarify periodically.
I don't believe that Rykart's goal is to improve the lives of Palestinians though, otherwise he would seek out my and others' ideas as to how to accomplish that. I think he has other motives that he pretends are progressive in some regard. (I guess I went over my commitment not to imagine what others think.)
Seems from the two posts immediately above that Richard Witty is actually Chris Berel, just less direct–actually, way less direct.
Rykart's goal seems pretty clear to me–I think he wants us to see clearly what is in fact happening to the Palestinians on the ground, and has been for a long time. His invective, which I do not
support, seems to me a result of his frustration at trying to get across to people like Witty that
their armchair Reasonable Man rhetoric hides the gross disparity in power that is the reality.
Rykart does not like this done in his name. Witty and his fellow-travelers do not see that Rukart's
frustration is similar to that felt by the Wittys back in the day, during Nam Era, when, of course,
an added bonus was burning your draft card. Rykart's protest at all the word games is more justified as the Draft is not an issue. I have seen that Rykart has sought out Witty's input, but simply found, over time, that Witty is dishonest, that Witty's vague abstract equitable rhetoric
is, whether Witty consciously intends or not, a fan continually blowing ill winds for the people
suffering directly and most, that is, the Palestinians.
There is ample evidence that the Zionist venture in Palestine is running out of steam – a recent CIA report gives the "Jewish State" twenty years maximum. Only the utterly mis/uniformed fail to comprehend the fact that Israel is America's number one geopolitical liability. It is only a matter of time before the US will act in its own best interests and end its "special relationship" with or "passionate attachment" to Israel. Meanwhile, Israeli Jews will continue to pour out of Israel and what little immigration there is will shrink further. Israel is what it has always been – an historical anachronism – doomed. Apart from everything else that is contributing to its demise, there just are not enough Jewish babies. In 15-20 years: 2.5 billion Muslims; 700 million Arabs, including 12-15 million Palestinians between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea. CHECKMATE!!
Poor little David, doomed to be dust while Israel continues as a shining star in the Middle East. Hopefully, it won't be the only democratic nation there.
American Jews are some of the dumbest people in the world. They're willing to sacrifice their own to be accepted by their fellow liberals. Has anything changed in 4,000 years? There are a bunch of thugs and terrorists in the middle east who are more than willing to blow themselves up to rid the world of the jews. If American Jews think they can condemn their brothers and appease the Arabs and remain safe they're just deceiveing themselves. Do you not know history? The Arabs control Syria, Iran, Jordan, Egypt, Iraq, Saudi Arabia, etc., etc., etc., and the Jews control a little piece of land no bigger than Rhode Island. And who has the only democracy? Give me a break, if Israel is destroyed it will be on your heads, and they'll be coming for you next.