At the risk of riding a serotonin spike, which I believe is the duty of a writer, I felt a thrill this a.m. reading Anshel Pfeffer’s piece in Haaretz attacking Israeli Amb. Michael Oren for not signing up for the J Street conference. Pfeffer addresses the idea of Jewish indifference to Jewishness. It made me feel love for my Jewishness; made me think that this horrible nightmare of occupation, which is actually an occupation of identity by the militants, may be coming to an end; and that the J Street conference, while disappointing in prospect in some ways to people on the left including me, represents a great awakening of the spirit. Sort of like what it felt like to throw off Shabbateinism in the 1600s. I’m thinking the conference might be a gathering of the spirit. The neocons hate J Street. And that makes me love J Street. It makes me think this is why I headed for the door back in the ’70s, when the mantra, Is it good for the Jews? was always whispered, not very ironically. I didn’t want any part of that kind of community, not when I was meeting non-Jews as peers.
Pfeffer (not the Zionist part, but the identity part):
And during a period when interest among young American Jews in their Jewish identity, let alone in Middle East politics, is at an all-time low, this is one group which is bucking the trend and motivating thousands to get engaged with the fundamental questions concerning Israel’s future.
Many of Israel’s supporters would rather J Street not exist, preferring apathy to being challenged. J Street has rocked the Jewish machers’ cozy boat ride.
Whatever one thinks of J Street’s policies, at least they give a damn. The old guard of the Jewish "leadership" is now trying to delegitimize the lobby, but it is not their business to tell others how they should support Israel. And it certainly isn’t for the Israeli ambassador to bestow or withhold his approval from Jewish organizations.
I agree: the prospect of American Jews re-claiming their Jewishness (i.e. firing Israel) is very exciting.
Official Israel is fighting this because Israel was never about serving the diaspora (contrary to the rhetoric of Zionism), but the other way round.
Official Israel and most Israelis are still stuck in “perpetual adolescence.” The founding myth of the teenagers and twentysomething pioneers was: we’re rebelling against the old ways of mom and dad in the diaspora—but don’t you forget to send me my allowance.
At the risk of riding a serotonin spike, which I believe is the duty of a writer…
That may be the finest opening line that I have ever read.
RE: Anshel Pfeffer’s piece in Haaretz attacking Israeli Amb. Oren
MY FAVORITE LINE: “What do these limp-wristed shtetl Jews who have never held an M-16 know about running a country?” (the old guard’s disdain for J Street)
P.S. A seretonin spike is nothing compared to a good dopamine spike.
“And now abide seretonin, norepinephrine, dopamine, these three; but the greatest of these is dopamine.”
Phil should certainly be well educated enough to know that the best writing is the result of extreme dysphoria, not euphoria. No wonder he writes the way he does.
“Firinf Israel” and “reclaiming your Judaism” are too completely different and unrelated things in my opinion.
Anyway, after you “fire Israel” you better count on making up a whole new Judaism, since almost anyplace Judaism is organised, it is organised around or by Israel and Zionists.
Apart from that one disciplining or organising factor, Judaism is a free-for-all.
Of course, it’s your choice if you want to grab a piece of Judaism, or you must let Judaism grab a piece of you. Oh shit, they’ve already done that! Well, that doesn’t entitle them to the rest.
I, myself, and several other fourth-round draft-picks yet to be named believe that American Jews don’t need to go to Israel to find their Judaism. Sometimes you find it right in your own backyard, which explains why so many Jews move to the suburbs.
The blacks moved to the suburbs for the same reasons white non-jews did. That has zippo to do with being jewish. Mooser, get real. I know that’s a stretch, but it’s gotta be easier for you then for Witty, your consolation–this despite Witty being the financial accountant and the lesser in tolerance for goys.
Citizen, it is an incontestable fact that you can’t find happiness in your own back yard, unless you got one. What, are we supposed to find happiness in the alley between two apartment buildings? Feh!
All archeological, anthropological, evolutionary and hysterical evidence is that man evolved as a suburban animal. Scientists mark the moment at which our ancestors first barbecued and tried to grow a lawns on the East African Savannah as distinguishing us from the lower apes.
“the lesser in tolerance for goys” Now, you might have me there, Citizen, I married one (although I have expelled the word “Goy” from my vocabulary, and suggest you do the same. It’s a degrading racist term.)
Could you not put my comments in that column on the right, please? Is their no privacy around here?
Get a bigger cod piece, if that’s possible.
“It made me feel love for my Jewishness; made me think that this horrible nightmare of occupation…
As opposed to the much less horrible nightmare of the overall Zionist colonial project? Yeah, I know where you’re coming from, Phil, once you get a pice of ground, it’s awful hard to give it up, although it doesn’t mean you need to go on torturing the neighbors after you stole the land. After all, we wouldn’t want to have to depend completely for America for our Jewish identity. And after all, all those independent Evangelical mega-churches may have huge buildings, but do they have their own country?
I gotta say, I agree with Mooser’s estrangement here. In his case he’s an American Jew, and in my case I am an American non-jew; I really have a hard time with
the usual sentiments, and so does Mooser.
unable to get in at another thread here
Kathleen, it’s been my experience that Mondowiess can be slow, or fussy about loading, now and then. It may be a bandwidth problem (actually that would be good “problem” if it arose from traffic) but usually, “try again later” solves it.
Anyone who has the least interest in seeing US policy in the ME change must support what J-Street is doing. Their specific prescriptions for a solution are not that important (I think they are unrealistic in many respects) but their importance is that they are challenging the traditional Jewish organizations. They have the potential of breaking the lock on US policy towards Israel. This would in itself be huge. All the arguments about apartheid, one-state, two-state, a Jewish state or a truly democratic state would change immediately. It would change because these debates could be held openly in the American political arena for the first time. Once that breaks out whatever detailed positions that J Street may or may not agree with are secondary.
Seems true. For the first time in American history, with the help of J street average Americans might actually get some truth on what they are enabling in the I-P arena.
Now wouldn’t that be nice for the theory of a USA with an informed public?
“Anyone who has the least interest in seeing US policy in the ME change must support what J-Street is doing.”
Must? The rest of us (98%) have to sit around and wait while two groups of Zionist Jews decide policy for us? I think it was Hannah Arendt who opposed school desegregation on the grounds that black children were forced in the schoolyard to fight a battle that their parents should have fought. I think that Gentile America gives up too much if we allow J-Street and AIPAC to settle this issue alone.
Todd people like you and me simply have no say on US policy towards Israel. That is a political fact of life that I would like to see changed. What J Street is doing right now has the potential to break the lobby’s control over that policy. I believe once that occurs it will open the door for even us to enter.
I argue in Introduction: Jewish Historical Political Economics that anti-Zionism and opposition to the existance of the State of Israel should constitute the great cause to unite all patriotic Americans and to reclaim American moral stature.
But most of us do not oppose the existence of the State of Israel. Many, at least myself, believe it is not the obligation of the US to support and fund Israel in her perpetual state of war and certainly should not be fighting in them.
GalenSword,
Nice to see you again Joachim. To satisfy curiosity about the level of freedom of this site, would you care to inform us if Phil Weiss and Company just delinked your website from Mondoweiss, or if they actually banned you from commenting. I ask this because of the recent brouhaha with Chris Moore, and because you’re no longer commenting under the Thorsprovoni moniker.
Thank you
FPM
” To satisfy curiosity about the level of freedom of this site,”
I don’t want to shock you, Frankie, but “freedom of speech” does not include an obligation from Phil Wiess to let every idiot in the world use his bandwidth. Are you able to grasp that, or do you subscribe to a teabaggers concept of “freedom of speech”?
Phil lets me post, unhindered, uncircumcised… damn it, I mean “uncircumscribed”
and freedom beyond that can only devolve into anarchy, I mean to say, really, after all!
Why don’t you go read “Joachim” in his disquisitions on evolution and Darwin and then tell me any person above a basal intellectual metabolism would tolerate him for a second? What he is, is, a pretty dumb guy who has learned to type, and insists on doing so.
Galen, please bear in mind that “opposition” to the existence of Israel isn’t needed, nor is it even really, except as an act of righteous hipocrisy, warranted.
All it would take to force Israel to make drastic compromises and changes is simple neutrality or even handedness on America’s part. Even just the simple alienation of American Jews from Israel could be impossible for Israel to withstand without changing.
Hey, but if you think “anti-Zionism and opposition to the existance of the State of Israel should constitute the great cause to unite all patriotic Americans and to reclaim American moral stature” is the banner you can gather the multitudes under, you go right ahead and try it.
Now, tell me, Galen, why do I get the idea that your opposition to Israel and Zionism is based mostly on perceived, oh, shall we say cultural, moral and ethical defeciencies you find endemic to Jews? And how necessary it is to purge these alien defeciencies from our culture and politics Sure, I could be going way out on a limb here, but that “Jewish Historical Political Economics” sounds fishy, to me.
Well, good luck with it, anyway. Like I say, changes in American policy towards Israel will be discussed and implemented with the same depth and integrity that all our foreign-policy issues are decided.
I agree, I support J-Street. To me, as a practical matter (the power of AIPAC & the
lack of campaign finance reform), it can only only help in terms of over all humanism
implemented. Arendt was wonderful in her analysis of Nazi Germany and the unintentioned help by its deniers, and in her guidance for future humanity re the Nuremberg trials, but if she actually said what you say about schoolyard kids,
which I am igorant of, it still does not take away from her over all lessons of Nazi Germany and the involved Jews at that time. I do agree however, that gentile USA
should not allow J-ST & AIPAC to settle our situation, a 98% situation.
This is a good overview of Arendt’s views:
link to archives.econ.utah.edu
She’s writing more about the individual v. government, and I’m more concerned with special or ethnic interests v. majority, but the point in both cases is that there are definite limits to power, and that it is best not to allow anyone, group or entity to make decisions or fight battles in your name.
but if she actually said what you say about schoolyard kids,
She was pretty smart if she said that. It is, in fact, the awful truth. You must have noticed that many white people have decided that the right to not lend their good will to the struggle for equal, non-racial rights is the right they will fight and die for. And once the laws (desegregation, affirmative action) were passed, the rest was dependent on the good will and willingness to participate in the process of the white people. And that they would die before they gave. It is not fair to leave kids alone to fight that. But would anybody have approved of first, making the segregated black schools equal in facilities and resources to white schools, and then letting de-segregation be voluntary? I really doubt it, whites won’t even fund their own schools if they think minority enrollments will become large.
And then we got this rash of “religious” private schools as a way of avoiding integration. They would rather their kids go to school and learn the earth is flat.
Galensword,
There are so many causes that should unite true Americans and help old Uncle Sam to stand up straight morally again. Cutting off funds for the Zionist State, refusing to use te veto in the UN, etc are among them, but not the only ones. Perhaps outright opposition to the existence of Israel is not the best way; it’s just not realistic. Rooting out the so-called Americans whose main loyalties lie with another state would be more effective; then let the population of the Middle East take care of their own problems.
FPM
In order to root out dual loyalists, that is, Israel Firsters as to their leaders in all
the walls of the US government, nothing is needed except a free press, which we don’t
have. How can we rid the MSM (demos and repubs) of their one-sided view of the
Middle East when it comes to the I-P conflict? I’d really like to get a clue.
Citizen, I am sure that the change in America’s policy towards Israel will come about as the result of the process which guides our thinking and action about all foreign policy decisions. I expect it to be made with all the gravity and integrity given to, say, the decision to go to war on Iraq. Anotherwords, it’ll be a frickin mess. Oh, I am sure a very reduced or even eliminated amount of support for Israel will come about, when enough anti-Semitism is generated. Now, don’t get me wrong, this reduced support for Israel is a consummation devoutly, as they say, to be desired, but the process by which we get there, well, like I say, it’ll probably be on about the same level as our decision to make war on Iraq, or several other places.
Anyway, I’m sure you will do your part, Citizen. Go get ‘em patriot!
“To satisfy curiosity about the level of freedom of this site,”
Because the First Amendment requires that every blog welcome back a banned poster who registers under a different name? When did Mondowiess start attracting anarchists?
Or possibly you are being ironic?
@Mooser
“She was pretty smart if she said that. It is, in fact, the awful truth. You must have noticed that many white people have decided that the right to not lend their good will to the struggle for equal, non-racial rights is the right they will fight and die for. And once the laws (desegregation, affirmative action) were passed, the rest was dependent on the good will and willingness to participate in the process of the white people. And that they would die before they gave. It is not fair to leave kids alone to fight that. But would anybody have approved of first, making the segregated black schools equal in facilities and resources to white schools, and then letting de-segregation be voluntary? I really doubt it, whites won’t even fund their own schools if they think minority enrollments will become large.
And then we got this rash of “religious” private schools as a way of avoiding integration. They would rather their kids go to school and learn the earth is flat.”
Arendt didn’t have a problem with exclusion, as long as it wasn’t written into law. Unless she has written more extensively on the issue, it also looks like she was against forced inclusion, as well. From what I’ve read of Arendt, I view her opinions of the U.S. as those of an outsider (whose facts can be wrong) with a very clear political and ethnic bias. I agree with some of her opinions, and some of her views are way off mark.
Also which religious schools teach the flat earth? Arendt seemed to argue that that the politicizing of education would lead to the destruction of public education, which is almost prophetic on her part! I wouldn’t call it an act of racism to pull a kid from a public school and place him in a religious private school, which is often the only affordable alternative to the rot of the public school.