Yesterday Bruce Wolman sent me the following note, about an argument I was having with a progressive Zionist:
It's time to build bridges to the non-Jewish world and stop worrying about
converting more Jews to the cause. Liberal Jews will either come on
board or they won't, but there are diminishing returns arguing directly
with them. Let's work towards a situation where they are forced to
argue with the non-Jewish world, who are still mostly uninformed and
disinterested, and need to be mobilized. The prospects of war with Iran should be the theme to getting their interest level up. I'm not sure Palestinian suffering is sufficient on its own.
This echoes a theme I have heard from Anna Baltzer, and Phyllis Bennis too. Pitch your words to a general audience. They are right, and still I admit I am engaged by the Jewish community here, and always will be to some degree..
Also that $30 billion we promised them. That'll mobilize the uninformed and disinterested, just like the AIG bonuses.
Progressive Zionist. Isn't that an oxymoron?
Progressive anti-Zionist is also an oxymoron.
I also suggested Phil NOT focus his research and writing time on Gaza, instead focus on Iran.
If your appeal to non-Jewish audiences is idealism, commitment to democracy universally applied, wonderful.
If your appeal to non-Jewish audiences is the same occassional flirting with fascist themes (defining you as the "good Jew"), then don't. Rather change first, then do.
But, be aware that when citing such angry commentary to attempt to move a currently ignorant audience (especially if you remain ignorant of the history thoroughly from multiple perspectives), that you risk encouraging real evil in the world, at a LARGER scale than anything that Israel does (even if your suspicions were accurate).
You can't be "pretty good" at this.
Also,
Please be aware that the conflict IS between Israel and Palestine, and NOT between US and Israel or US and Palestine.
To suggest intervention at any significant level IS to practise what you contest, not all that different from Iraq.
The right here historically suggested that the US REMOVE its involvement from the region entirely (maybe the anti-semitic right only included Israel from that divestment). You are suggesting getting MORE INVOLVED.
The theme of attempting to persuade the parties is a more just one.
Witty is wrong.
I cannot properly engage in the dialogue as a Gentile, precisely because of what Witty describes — Gentiles fear being labeled an anti-Semite in McCarthy style smashmouth tactics . . . Progressive Jews fear that if the schism goes mainstream, it will unleash real mass anti-Semitism among the latent bigots in the US . . . Zionists fear that if the debate comes out into the open, the $30 billion promised by Bush and the neo-cons will disappear in an AIG-style populist revolt.
So the MSM still does not report the atrocities in Gaza. Or when it does, it provides a "balanced" account of the deaths of peaceful activists (i.e., the hasbara side from the IDF).
Progressive Gentiles cannot lend their voices to the cause of peace without the voices of Phil and Adam informing us that there is an alternative to the Israel-first thinking of Zionists. Suddenly, we can understand that there can be a distinction, much as there is Republican vs. Democrats, conservative vs. liberal, carnivores vs. vegetarians, etc.
I care about a two-state solution. I recognize Israel's right to exist. I recognize Palestine's right to exist. As a human being, I despise the atrocities being committed by the IDF in the name of sabotaging the two-state solution. The president I voted for has informed the world that HE is making the two-state solution is the centerpiece of his foreign policy and must be achieved within the first four years of his term. I abhor the blatant racism of Lieberman who appears to see Arabs as sub-human and is combative against any peaceful solution to the Palestine dilemma. Most of my friends are Jewish, and my wife is Jewish. I am not. I keenly await developments from the internet that tell me it is politically appropriate to join the Progessive Jewish voices of my friends in protesting the violence in Gaza, the deaths of Rachel Corrie and the severe disfigurement of Tristan Anderson in the name of peace. I firmly believe the uprooting of status quo is not only necessary, it is inevitable.
So, Witty — you do nothing to provide clarity on how I can achieve these goals without being branded an anti-Semite by Chris Berel and his comrades. Phil and Adam are leading the charge for this movement, and you're right, they're not "pretty good" at it. They are "astoundingly good" at it.
Bruce's advice sounds right-on to me. It's time for activism. If the tribal therapy side is attractive to you, let it proceed in parallel. But sixty years is enough.
Perhaps we can even expect to see a BDS logo somewhere on the site?
PS – the Iran issue is a canard, an "ignore-the-man-behind-the-curtain" sham intended to change the conversation from the war crimes committed by the IDF and now being investigated by Richard Goldstone.
With Biden's comment about Iran recently, and the obvious cooling towards Netanyahu, I dont think Iran looms large. N would have to be suicidal to bomb Iran any time soon. And if Lieberman should do it on his own, if that's even possible, then its curtains for Israel. The world will hate it; no amount of anti-semitism thumping will stop that reaction.
While I understand what Wolman's trying to say, I think the group in the US that needs its eyes opened is the Evangelical crowd. They're the ones still under Begin's sway, his original love affair with Jerry Falwell over — ick — homosexuals. Hatred of homosexuals. That now appears to be going the way of the great white whale. So maybe they might be willing to look at the other edicts. Who knows.
These Abrahamic religions have been around a long time. I, for one, am fed up with them.
I actually think you're doing the right mix, Phil.
israel has been sleeping in bed with the usa for so long, it is a conflict as a result… a conflict of interest for a number of so called americans who put israels interests before the usa's… that is a clear conflict witty..
Hear, hear, Oscar!
So Oscar,
You are speaking about conflicts that you have in determining what to speak up about.
For clarity. Acknowledge that the conflict itself is between two remote parties. Respectfully your business as a human being, definitely your business to comment on unnecessary and structural harms, to those that you observe being harmed.
I would recommend that you calmly be proud of your good intent (if thats what it is), and remind any that hassle you that that is your motivation.
Phil's risk is in fomenting hate. Hate that is obvious to anyone that has publicly demonstrated for MUTUAL respect, or who has ever posted here with a critical word for Hamas or a kind word for Israel.
"Phil's risk is in fomenting hate"
Sure Richard, cause the Jew in America have only acheived the most marginal of places in American society. They are on the verge of getting pushed out any time.
"Acknowledge that the conflict itself is between two remote parties." Oh Jesus, what crap! Hey Israel stops taking the Gentiles money, and you can ask them to shut up about it. But since Israel can't get along (in fact, would never have been created) without Gentile money and co-operation, well, they get something to say about it.
"Hate that is obvious to anyone that has publicly demonstrated for MUTUAL respect, or who has ever posted here with a critical word for Hamas or a kind word for Israel."
Sticks and stones, Richard. You want respect for your religion, that you are entitled to. You want to make a state by "right of conquest" well, it gets a little rough. And nobody cares if you whine.
Witty: "be aware that the conflict IS between Israel and Palestine, and NOT between US and Israel or US and Palestine."
The Israel lobby has made it a conflict between the US and Palestine, the US and the Arab world, the US and the Muslim world…
And because it has done this, it is now a conflict between the US and Israel, and the US and the Israeli lobby. (And Witty, you yourself have stated that diaspora Jewish Zionists are a nation unto themselves ("We are a nation…"). And therefore, the conflict involves the US and that nation as well.
What I really wish is that the last nation would come out of the shadows and declare its sovereignty just as certain Islamist sharia law advocates in parts of Europe have. The whole shadow government thing is so dishonest and corrosive. And the end result is suspicion of ALL Jews, because no one knows which nation’s interests any given Jew is really pursuing.
But I guess implicating non-Zionist Jews is one of the things that Zionists love about the shadow nation concept, because it either ultimately forces ALL Jews into the Zionist camp, or leaves their asses hanging in the wind. Pretty nasty business. And it begs the question: how much anti-semitism is being deliberately inflamed by Zionist Jews? It seems to me, groups like the ADL couldn't be more offensive to patriotic Americans if they tried.
Judging from the comments, HuffPo has now become Hasbara Central and an utter bore to read, or comment on. I've decided not to increase its hits if I can help it. Anything important will show up here as a snip or a link.
Oscar's point is well-taken by me. I've had more years than I care to remember with Jewish acquaintances telling me that I dont understand the Jewish perspective as if biological plumbing were the only means of understanding another. "You're not a Jew, you'd never understand." I lived in Manhattan half my life. I know the drill. I was steeped in Jewish holidays, the history, and Yiddish lore. My best friends were Jewish. My mentors were Jewish. And still, out by the side of the road of my life is that sign that says 'You're a Gentile, you can never understand' as if there were some profound mystery that is ungraspable without a Rabbi's blessing or temple rites.
What it comes down to is that I dont agree with certain points-of-view. For example, I dont agree with Mort Zuckerman's idea of Jewishness/fealty to Israel; I like Jeff Blankfort's. A mentor's wife was a rabid, I mean balls-out rabid Likudist. You couldn't talk to her, or say anything in front of her that didn't comport with her worldview of Israel. Her husband was the opposite. He waited until she was out of the room and read me the riot act, and corrected her position. He corrected the memory of events she recalled of their on again-off again time in Israel. He explained away her 1950s view of utopian Israel as something that I was not to place any truck in. He made me read obscure books about Jewish history that I rarely see quoted. He, personally, came to despise the Israeli quality that David Brooks railed against in his column. He wanted nothing more to do with Sabras and came back to the US for good. I never confronted his wife because of her age, and out of deep respect for her husband. The stuff she said about the Palestinians and Arabs even back then was hideous. Odious. And yet she was a charming wonderful magnificent woman otherwise.
It was biting my tongue for so long, I think, that it caused me, forced me, to read everything about I-P and form opinions. In addition, my erudite mentor was an encyclopedia of historical information with a razor-sharp intelligence. Israeli politicians made it a point to pay him respect when they came to New York, and I met some of them with him.
And yet, even with all that, when I go to sites OTHER THAN THIS ONE I am automatically presumed to be precluded from saying anything about the situation in Israel because my mother wasn’t a Jew, which is somehow presumed to affect my thinking power. My existence becomes anti-semitism in and of itself, as if I have to apologize for it, and I reject that profoundly.
Or I get attacked by the likes of a Chris Berel or a Suzanne or Eurosabra as evil incarnate because I wont go along with their mobius strip about Palestine. I wont buy, I wont drink, their poisoned kool-aid.
Witty,
"Acknowledge that the conflict itself is between two remote parties." I wish it were.
US Congressmen have lost their seats, fledgling politicans have been destroyed, and people's careers in journalism and business and writing decimated because 'whomever' didn't toe the Likud line. A (Jewish) ambassador just wrote a book in which he said that he was convinced the Mossad tied to kill him in the 80s for representing America's interests and not Israel's, even though he was the American ambassador to an ME country.
i haven't went to huffpost for a good year or 2… why bother when there are many better news outlets around?
Oscar and MRW, beautiful! thank you both.
I do appreciate Witty's restrained response to my post, especially given some of the flaming posts that Phil and Adam have had to eradicate in recent days. Thank you for that.
Also, I appreciate that MRW book-ended my post with his/her own experience. Phil had an excellent post recently about the gifts that the Jewish diaspora has brought to enrich the American culture. It got me to thinking about my own experiences as a Gentile . . . my appreciation of American popular culture, value of higher education and a graduate degree in law, a career on Wall Street with my Jewish friends as lawyers and financiers on some of my best transactions, my admiration for the commitment of my friends and in-laws to the high holidays — even my own children's Jewish upbringing.
As an "intermarried" Gentile, my children are being brought up Jewish and, of course, it gives me a keen insight to the zeitgeist of the magnificent culture my children are — by blood — part of. I don't feel like an outsider in the Jewish culture; I know more classic Yiddish phrases than my wife does.
But . . . Zionists are several breeds apart from the Tikkun-devoted identity of the American Jews of my experience. There is a "Jewish guilt" being imposed on progressive Jews to fall in line for Israel — no matter what, even if it means annihilating the women and children of Palestine with DIME weapons and white phosphorus missiles.
This intellectually dishonest dogma takes the worst elements of humanity (the dehumanization of Arabs, for example) and, as a result, the deception of hasbara fills the pages of the Washington Post, my otherwise beloved Wall Street Journal, TNR, The Atlantic, any Krauthammer column, any Alan Dershowitz op-ed, any William Kristol propaganda piece. In the age of the Internet, such propaganda is extremely insulting to the high-information denizons of the I/P puzzle.
Contrary to Richard Witty's supposition, I submit that Phil and Adam are doing the opposite of fomenting anti-Semitism; they are circumventing it.
On what basis, you may ask?
Because they are drawing the bright-line between the growing number of progressive American Jews who vociferously state to the world "Zionism does not define us!" and the Kool-Aid-gulping, whatever-AIPAC-says crowd that tries to convince me that Lieberman is not the David Duke of the Middle East, and that the IDF is the "most moral army in the world."
There is a long-overdue fault line developing between the progressive Jewish intellectuals and the hard-line, US-taxpayer-dollar-stealing Zionists who use smashmouth tactics to shut down Norm Finkelstein and Desmond Tutu. I believe in peace, and Phil and Adam selflessly devote themselves to this same objective — with no pecuniary motivation. They simply believe they have to use their gifts to help change the course of history in this last clear chance for a two-state solution.
As a result, I will follow them anywhere this movement takes us. If Abe Foxman wants to call them "self-hating assimilists" or call me an "anti-Semite" . . . well, bring it on, Foxy. There is a momentum . . . you can feel it . . . our President is one of the "secret sharers."
Keep the anti-Semitism out of it, everyone. Stay intellectually honest. Get involved. Write the senators and congresspeople under the sway of The Lobby and out them. Contribute to ActBlue and J Street. Be part of something much bigger than yourself.
I still don't see why Judaism, Jewishness or anti-Semitism has all that much to do with it. It's the settler-colonial project.
Once you start on one of those, you travel the same path, no matter which God you worship with what intensity. Or you could do the same thing on a purely commercial basis.
What most of this has to do with always avoiding the central explosive facts of Zionism- that it causes and requires Jews to minipulate and hoax other less-advantaged Jews.
Oscar, I wish that Phil and Adam were accomplishing the gathering of the good-hearted.
From what I see, there is the odd-bedfellow dilemma.
I've some experience with this. I've attended pro-Palestinian demonstrations with a friend rabbi carrying a sign with an Israeli flag stating peace is better, and another time carrying a sign with an Israeli flag and Palestinian flag stating "we should be good neighbors to good neighbors".
He and I were harrangued, taunted. On another occassion the rabbi told me that demonstrators through rocks at him.
Its not just the manipulation by the Israeli right. Its our liberal actual experience.
We liberal peace-seeking Jews, that DID and DO regard Palestinians as human, deserving of rights, deserving of self-governance (but also regarding Israelis as human, deserving of rights, deserving of self-governance), were forced to then conduct our peace-seeking and education efforts also on the margins.
Again, I'll point to the period of time before the Israeli military effort in Gaza. For the week that Hamas shelled Israeli civilian towns following the end of the cease-fire, Phil for example did NOT contest the justice or the wisdom of that. He consistently spoke ONLY of the blockade.
Its not peace-seeking, and not justice-seeking. There is too much emotion that clouds important strategic and moral decisions in the areas that we act.
Anger, rather than thought, rather than compassion. In the name of thought and compassion. Further is needed. A start down a path, not a fulfillment.
Witty,
Your facts, are wrong. You're pulling something arbitrary out of a timeline and way out of the context with the facts. You need to go back to Nov 4th, Election night here, and research what happened. And you need to research the cease-fire from June 2008 to Nov 4, 2008.
You're way off base here, pal. And you need to use credible overseas NGO sources, not the NYT. Also, you need to triple source each detail.
What did you say about the blockade, Witty? I've never seen you condemn it.
Your long term intentions are good, but your rules for dissent would eliminate 90 percent of the legitimate criticism of Israel. The mainstream liberals in the US have been following your rules of dissent for decades and what's been the result? I'll answer with an anecdote. A good friend of mine, liberal, someone who trusts the NYT implicitly, once said that he didn't think that bulldozing houses was nearly as bad (not morally equivalent, he said) to suicide bombing. And he's right, it's not. But Israel kills civilians, it doesn't just bulldoze homes, and it has always done this. Where did my friend get his misimpression? From being bombarded with the kind of "criticism" that stayed within the parameters that you would set, the kind of criticism that pulls no punches when condemning Hamas suicide bombing, but speaks in hushed oh-so-measured and watered-down tones when talking about Israel's crimes. Your advice boils down to this–tell the full truth about Palestinian terrorism, but spare Zionist feelings when talking about Israel. None of us here are going to take your advice, because it is immoral.
Again, I concur, Oscar.
But a minor quibble about human nature. The anti-semitism thing is going to rear its head as part of the cleansing process, just as the repressed racial stuff coming out now about Obama is part of what must be burned off. Obama doesn't pay it an ounce of attention. (I'm one of those who saw the tea-baggers 'revolt' as a veiled racism opportunity.)
And the anti-semitism thing will cut along both sides of the aisle. The accusations of anti-semitism will be fair and unfair. And the expressions of it will be real and not real.
As an example, imagine if Bernie Madoff had ripped off only gentiles. Just think of the damage-control that would probably still be going on by Foxman to keep it from blowing into a from-his-perspective-full-force anti-semitism campaign, think of the overkill that Foxman would be doing which at the same time would be denying the full pain Madoff caused. the anti-semitism slurs would be going back and forth with fury. But instead, Bernie burned his fellow Americans, irrespective of religious affiliation, maybe even because of the affiliation. I didn't hear a peep out of the gentile losers in that fraud about Madoff's Jewishness, at least not publicly. The shock that Bernie would do it to members of his own tribe was so overwhelming and the parade of Jewish losers in the fraud so pervasive on TV that the anti-semitism thing didn't get started. Because people were telling the truth and not being pigeon-holed for bitching.
It's a lousy example but you get what I mean.
MRW.
We've been through this at length. The facts are that in the first month and a half of the cease-fire, Hamas only reduced shelling, not discontinued themselves nor enforced it.
Three months later (to their credit, they maintained it and risked credibility to do so), they built a tunnel near the Israeli border. Its unclear if that tunnel was defensive or offensive, or where it extended to. Israeli forces did cross the Gaza border and attacked the tunnel. Firefights and shelling ensued through November 18th. From November 18th until December 18th, the cease-fire stood.
On December 18th, Hamas allowed other factions to shell Israel, even though the cease-fire extended to the 19th. They resumed shelling themselves a couple days later, and Israel did not respond militarily for 10 days. They warned that continuing the shelling would necessitate a military response.
On the 28th or 29th (I forgot the day), Israel launched an aerial assault (intense) on suspected Hamas, Islamic Jihad, PFLP military and administrative sites. The Hamas shelling continued and escalated. And, the Israeli assault escalated.
Both refused to reconsider.
Gideon Levy described the Hamas strategy as suicidal and horrible judgement, even as he severely criticized Israel's response, and the blockade.
On the blockade, I'm of two minds. I understand Gaza's isolation and understand that that cannot result in peace. And, I understand the status of Hamas as an extra-legal militia that has violently harrassed ALL of its neighboring states.
The key moment for their perseverence and playing to international sentiment was after the end of the formal cease-fire, which would indicate their commitment to mutuality. They opted for actions instead which described them as rejectionist.
If it weren't for the Israeli excessive response, Hamas would be entirely isolated in the world.
MRW: thanks for your thoughtful post. But I don't care about the anti-Semites who have nothing to contribute to the dialogue. Perhaps, as you suggest, it's the collateral damage bound to occur from challenging Zionism, in part because the Zionists have selfishly tried to make Jewish identity about being Israel-first. I don't connect with the Zionist POV.
I connect with the intellectually facile and Tikkun driven progressive Jews like Phil and Adam. If I can have an honest dialogue with the Mondoweiss progressives, I can be enlisted as a Gentile for the Greater Good of a two-state solution. Just tell me where to sign up.
Anti-Semitism is a distraction from the debate. Whether there are accusations of it by pro-Zionist apologists, or the David Duke empathizers who are awaiting the cue to rise up from the dead. I don't care for either group. It's simply white noise. An innocent population is being decimated with my tax dollars and the "willing executioners" of my duly elected Congress and Senate. This is a Howard Beale moment if there ever was one in our lifetime. Alan Dershowitz can't stop it, Abe Foxman can't stop it, and the power of the Internet as an agent of change, an oracle of truth has never been more self-evident.
You know my views — I've selfishlessly taken up too much real estate on this particular segment of Mondoweiss. But the game has changed, is still changing . . . and the two-state solution os not dead. It's very much alive and kicking.
PS – a note to "Witty's anonymous critic." I appreciate your views, but come up with a moniker that doesn't focus on Witty himself. I've found Witty to be engaged in an effort to provide a different perspective we may not agree with, but he signs his own name. Come up with one of your own, and don't be "anonymous." Join the debate.
Richard Witty – When visiting in the home of acquaintances, do you make conversation by commenting to those hosting you that they flirt with fascist themes? Do you correct their opinions? Do you toast your fellow diners with a description of them as ignorant? Do you consider such behavior to evince "thought and compassion"? I doubt a guest who behaved so would be welcome in your house.
"I abhor the blatant racism of Lieberman who appears to see Arabs as sub-human and is combative against any peaceful solution to the Palestine dilemma. Most of my friends are Jewish, and my wife is Jewish. I am not. I keenly await developments from the internet that tell me it is politically appropriate to join the Progessive Jewish voices of my friends in protesting the violence in Gaza, the deaths of Rachel Corrie and the severe disfigurement of Tristan Anderson in the name of peace. I firmly believe the uprooting of status quo is not only necessary, it is inevitable."
Me 2, but I don't wait for internet development to protest what any patriotic American should, not to mention any humanist. I assail my congress people all the time, and anyone I can nab on the corner or at the office. I am not mesmerized by any accident of birth and consequential group think. Do you have kids? Did you allow them to choose their own religion and/or tribal ID?
US B&R —
Unfortunately, the reality on the ground is that your single voice doesn't count for much in the I/P scenario. We have to join forces along the political reality of a MSM that prevents any voice such as yours being heard, or a Middle East situation that is dictated by the tens of millions that AIPAC directs to corrupt our political leaders.
You know from my post I have kids. Their religion or tribal ID is not particularly relevant to the debate, except for me to give you a sense that I have some connection to the Jewish community.
You're missing my point — we need to have a revolution among the progressive Jewish community to provide our voice. Otherwise, Abe Foxman will call you and me "anti-Semites." You may not like this reality, but it is what it is.
Give respect to Walt & Mearsheimer who — against their personal interests, but in the name of objective academic scholarship — identified the corruption of our elected official through AIPAC. Again, it is what it is, and as you, I am American born-and-bred. But if you care about the I/P situation, you have to get with the program.
You "assail my congresspeople all the time" — but how's that going so far? The puppets that were duly elected by born and bred Americans overwhelmingly voted for a resolution for "Israel's right to defend itself" which led to nearly 1,500 women and children being annihilated by DIME weapons and white phosporus bombs. You and I are on the same side of the debate, but you're wrong about your approach.
Witty, you've been corrected several times about the distinction between "shelling" and "rocket fire." Since I'm interested in military history, this error is very grating. You make it sound as if Hamas has heavy artillery pieces capable of precise targeting.
Rocket fire is too neutral a word.
Shelling did occur accompanying rocket fire.
I hear your objection. I choose to emphasize that the rockets were intentionally directed at civilians only, with the stated goal of getting them to leave (even though they reside in sovereign Israel).
I'll continue using the term "shelling".
On my relationship with Phil. Our personal relationship preceded this online one.
I know that Phil is an edge-walker. He's chosen that in his choice of career (with all the moral difficulties that a provocative journalistic career entails). In his choice of material, he has always addressed the contreversial.
He has, and knows he has, flirted with fascist themes here and elsewhere, and that that is a large element of the criticism of Walt/Mearsheimer, that they did similarly.
My points are that if you are going to edge-walk (in this case on the edge with consequences of being harmed, AND of harming), that it be done with precision, with FULL CARE (careful).
Bruce is an interesting case. He's a physician (I'm told). I don't know what kind of physician, a surgeon, a GP, some other specialist.
Its a precise job, which to be effective requires BOTH the right information to be diagnosed, with judgements as to what information is most important, what information to be conveyed, and HOW to convey it.
The significance of precision in that process, is that with precision, you can preserve both legs, without scars, and with full subsequent function.
Richard Witty, you continue to repeat your accusation of fascist themes, without ever giving an example. My understanding of fascism fits more with your stated attitudes than anything written by Phil that I've read. Without providing examples of where Phil's writing demonstrates these themes, you are wittering empty words.