Bridegroom Abdel Rahman Sha’ath, Mohammed Sha’ath, and Norman Finkelstein, Gaza City, June 2009
I’ve been citing Norman Finkelstein a lot lately because he has an important book coming out on the Gaza slaughter, ‘This Time We Went Too Far.’ Well last June, I wrote a piece about hanging out with Finkelstein in Gaza that I never posted because it had a disaster-tourism feel to it. I’m doing so now just… because life is complicated.
Norman Finkelstein hopped into an unmarked car in Gaza City and said to the driver, "If you’re kidnapping me, can you do me a favor? Please bring me to Brooklyn, it’s very peaceful."
The guy brought us to a busy intersection. Finkelstein got out and took a comb from his unbelted black jeans and combed his hair. A camera was set up in the street. The guy was interviewing Finkelstein for Iran’s Press TV.
I hung out with Finkelstein for a few days in Gaza. We didn’t talk politics; I have the sense that Finkelstein is a Bolshevik at heart. Mostly we tried to distract ourselves from the rubble. I hadn’t known that Finkelstein is funny. Generally Finkelstein looks grim, his craggy face like a president on Mount Rushmore. But he’s always waiting for an opportunity to crack up. Whenever we came out of a school or orphanage, after scenes of laughing, singing children, he would turn to me and say, "Did you see all the children being indoctrinated in terrorism!"
Holding up a baby in an orphanage, he cried out, "For the first time in my life, I haven’t been rejected…"
Leaving the orphanage, Finkelstein said to Medea Benjamin: "You remember what Che Guevara said, ‘At the risk of sounding ridiculous, all revolutionaries are motivated by great feelings of love.’"
I don’t remember that quote. Finkelstein often quotes revolutionaries. When I asked how long he lectured to Code Pink, the antiwar group that he accompanied into Gaza, in Egypt before they got in, Finkelstein said: "Oh, about 2-1/2 hours. I try to go somewhere between Hugo Chavez and Castro."
And when I said that Finkelstein must have felt alone in years gone by, before all the other critics of Israel started showing up, he said, "As you know– as Mao Tse Tung told Andre Malraux before the cultural revolution, ‘I am alone, with the masses.’"
In Finkelstein’s case, he means the Palestinian masses. This may not be true. Finkelstein is against the right of return; it is very clear that the Palestinian masses are for it. He’s for the two-state-solution. But an angry critique of Israel? Finkelstein’s got it. We were driving past scores of industrial buildings near Gaza’s eastern border, the civilian infrastructure crunched to the ground by mines and missiles (just as Goldstone said it was), when Finkelstein said the scene reminded him of Lebanon ’06. Israel is "a vandal state."
I asked him to elaborate, and he said:
"In the index of Benny Morris’s Righteous Victims, he lists all Israel’s military operations, and each has a name. I’ve studied this to the point of, I won’t say lunacy because people will nail me on it, but tedium, and even I can’t keep the names straight. But each operation is just an exercise in massive death and destruction. Two years ago it was Operation Summer Rains. Succeeded a few months later by Operation Autumn Clouds. It’s just nonstop destruction and death, and these names they dream up, if they had any honesty they would call it Operation Attila the Hun, followed by Operation Genghis Kahn, followed by Operation Murder, Incorporated.
"It’s a vandal state. You know how hysterical any one of us becomes when we lose everything on our computer. Well every few months everything these people have managed to accumulate is systematically destroyed again and again. It’s not just your C-drive."
I said I winced when Palestinians expressed anger at "the Jews." Finkelstein shrugged and said it was an understandable confusion. "My parents made a similar mistake," he said, referring to his parents who had survived Nazi death camps during the Holocaust. "They talked about the Germans, not the Nazis."
I teased Finkelstein a lot to try and get the Mount Rushmore face to crack. One day I told him I was reading a great book and as I reached for my backpack, Finkelstein turned to Roane Carey of the Nation and said, "It’s a joke– here comes a joke," before I could get out Benny Morris’s One State, Two State.
That night as Finkelstein, Carey, and I came out of a falafel joint in Gaza City, I banged on one of the ubiquitous steel water tanks that contain potable water, to make a resonant sound, and putting on a Charlton Heston voice, tried to bait the scholar:
"Nor-man! Nor-man! This is God. I’m on Mount Sinai. I’m angry at you. You’ve been bad!"
Finkelstein’s lip curled, a sign that he didn’t think it was funny, and right then two Palestinian guys came along, and one said, "Wait, aren’t you Norman Finkelstein??"
The two men were brothers, Abdel Rahman Sha’ath and Mohammed Sha’ath.
"I saw you lecture, you were great," Mohammed said. "I live in Wales."
"Was I ever in Wales?" Finkelstein said.
"No. This was in Manchester. I still have the poster on my wall."
Mohammed had come home to Palestine for Abdel Rahman’s wedding. As we walked back to the hotel in the dark, Finkelstein told a Jewish joke about marriage.
"A husband and wife were having a big fight. She said, ‘You are such a schmuck. You are just a complete schmuck. I should have known it right at the start. You are a schmuck. You know what, if they had a contest to find out who was the biggest schmuck in the world–you’d come in second!’
"The husband leans over. ‘Why second?’
"’Because! You are such a schmuck!‘"
(When I got home I saw Dan Okrent, former public editor of the Times, tell the same joke online. Okrent is no Finkelstein.)
The next day we went to Islamic University and saw the Science Building that had been bombed by the Israelis. Our guide explained that it contained the only gene-sequencing facility in the territory, which local hospitals used for clinical purposes. Many times on our trip people walked away from the group so they wouldn’t fall apart in front of other people. I saw Finkelstein walking away then. Education is central to him– when Palestinian students asked him for advice, he was always asking them what they’d gotten on the big entrance exam they all take.
We went inside the school and had a meeting with the president of Islamic U, Kamalain Sha’ath. He served us cake and spoke about the agony of the siege. 44 percent of young Gazans attend higher education, "a number approaching the level of developed countries." The siege has stopped higher education in its tracks.
Afterwards Sha’ath walked over to Finkelstein with a big smile. "You met my sons last night."
"Oh, those were your sons! One of them is getting married."
"Yes. You are a survivor of the Holocaust, right?"
"No, no– close. I was denied tenure."
Update: Finkelstein explained his position re the Right of Return:
The U.N. General Assembly and major human rights organizations such as Amnesty International and Human Rights Watch have ratified the Palestinians’ right to return to their homeland. Our responsibility is to support that right. Palestinians might decide not to exercise that right, or exercise it only in part, in the context of a comprehensive settlement. But that is for them to decide, not anyone else.
Norman’s great. I heard speak him here in Cville a few years ago. Richard Herskowitz (then director of the Virginia Film Festival) was sitting next to me. He and Norman had obviously known each other for some years. Norman was talking about the “new” anti-semitism (amongst other things) and relating it to old accusations of anti-semitism.
Looking at his friend the film festival director, Norman asked him, “What early 1970′s musical film was deemed anti-semitic by the ADL?” Poor Richard went blank and I leaned over and whispered, “Jesus Christ Superstar”.
Great little piece, Phil. Thanks.
“”Yes. You are a survivor of the Holocaust, right?”
“No, no– close. I was denied tenure.”
I think there’s a lot of pain in this joke (gee, now that’s unusual). All Germans were not, and are not Nazis or neoNazis, and all Jews were not, and are not Zionists.
Alone, with the masses.
Who can save us from the successive, elitist philosopher king regimes and movements ? Didn’t even Socrates give up?
And Christ himself, according to the narrative, and even more so how it’s been implemented, has
been a disaster as much as he’s been at least a benign influence.
Not a problem except in real life chess pawns are real humans.
Does this line of thinking give some credence to those who raise their eyebrows at leaders who never personally paid a price for what they are advocating? For example,
when does anyone use the line “walk a mile in my shoes” directed at anyone from a privileged class, for example as to education financing and military service as a grunt?
“Not a problem except in real life chess pawns are real humans.”
Best way to avoid that feeling is not to volunteer for the military. Didn’t anybody tell you that?
Good post, but (excuse me while I put on my nit-picking logician’s hat) the rule in English is that the negative goes before that which it negates.
According to this rule , “All Jews are not Zionists” means the same as ” no Jews are Zionists”.
I suspect that what you meant was “not all Jews are Zionists”.
And I’m sure you wanted to know that.
van⋅dal [van-dl]
–noun
1. (initial capital letter) a member of a Germanic people who in the 5th century a.d. ravaged Gaul and Spain, settled in Africa, and in a.d. 455 sacked Rome.
2. a person who willfully or ignorantly destroys or mars something beautiful or valuable.
–adjective
3. (initial capital letter) of or pertaining to the Vandals.
4. imbued with or characterized by vandalism.
Origin:
1545–55; < LL Vandalus, Latinized tribal name
Dictionary.com Unabridged
“Because! You are such a schmuck!”
I love the Jewish sense of humor. One of the most delightful literary experiences of my life was reading Leo Rosten’s The Joy of Yiddish for the first time, when I was about 15. I still tell jokes from that book — my favorite being the one Rosten uses to illustrate the Jewish use of the word “Aha!”
my favorite being the one Rosten uses to illustrate the Jewish use of the word “Aha!” Please tell, I’d love to find out.
I don’t have the book currently, so I’ll have to tell the joke my own way. I’m sure Rosten told it better.
This Jewish man walks into a restaurant and orders a bowl of soup. The soup arrives. A moment later, he calls the waiter back and says:
“Waiter, please taste this soup.”
“I’m sorry, sir, is there something wrong with it?”
“No, I just want you to taste it.”
“I can get you another bowl if you’d like.”
“No, no, just taste the soup.”
“Should I get the manager?”
“Waiter! Taste the soup!”
“Okay, okay… uh… where’s your spoon?”
The Jewish man holds up his index finger and says, “Aha!”
Nice :) .
The USA MSM has the spoon.
That’s the whole point of this blog.
To take it away and give it to the public.
Craig, you might enjoy Rosten’s H*Y*M*A*N K*AP*L*A*N books.
The first, very funny and charming, is “The Education of H*Y*M*A*N K*A*P*L*A*N”
i love Norm. yes he is very very frequently funny in his unique way as only norm can be. i spent a fair amount of time with him on that trip and wished more than once he would just put me in his pocket and take me home (something tells me others have walked this path). one thing people may not know about norm is he loves to sing and knows lots of lyrics. one time on the long bus trip home he leaned into my ear while i was sleeping and softly started singing ‘when the moon is in the second house and jupiter aligns with mars..’ , then we burst into song again.
Many times on our trip people walked away from the group so they wouldn’t fall apart in front of other people.
this is so true. i couldn’t make it thru even one day without sobbing. sometimes we could walk away but other times we were part of an audience in an enclosed space or office and i just had to lower my head and use all my power to be completely silent thru my tears and move as little as possible and control my breathing. sometimes it was so unbearable just listening i had to continually remind myself i was only witnessing the stories and remains and ruins of this tragedy and it wasn’t the same as being there during the destruction itself or watching my family members being slaughtered. i will never forget the doctors, the horror of wounds from experimental dime weapons. i think the doctors in gaza have seem wounds unlike any mankind has witnesses thus far.
i asked the doctors how they coped with knowing their family members were out there while they were treating victims inside the hospital and there was this perceptible schism of consciousness inside the office like an electric bolt followed by some moments i will never forget as long as i live.
sorry, i’m rambling. shout out to Roane, another amazingly entertaining person.
thank you for taking me back Phil. i’m becoming addicted to your blog.
I have a lot of respect for Norman Finkelstein. He pulls no punches and tells it like it is, which I highly respect. I have seen him speak a few times and have had brief conversations with him in person and in email, he really is a nice person. I have pre-ordered his new book and am axiously awaiting its arrival.
Stormin’ Norman. They don’t make ‘em like that very often. :)
This must be opposite day or something! For some reason, the thread on Finklestein prompted me to wonder, what’s happened to Witty? Seems like he hasn’t been among those present for a while.
Finkelstein has a mordant sense of humor. I delayed reading “The Holocaust Industry” for some time, because I was afraid that it might be an hysterical rant. The topic does that to people. Instead the book is mostly calm, matter-of-fact, and even has some “gallows humor.”
Raul Hilberg, the ‘dean of Holocaust Studies’, stated that Finkelstein’s findings were ‘moderate’ and that he could have gone much further.
“I said, Come on Norman, you didn’t like it. Well it’s wrong, he said; I am not a Bolshevik, I’ve never been a Bolshevik…I hung out with Finkelstein for a few days in Gaza. We didn’t talk politics; I have the sense that Finkelstein is a Bolshevik at heart.”
I have great respect Mr. Finkelstein, he is a meticulous and balanced scholar and a great human being. He has a balance of both light and fire, he helps illumine what he sets his mind on, and he burns with the truth. It has been said that some have a gift of logic on fire, and when this happens people come from all around to watch this person burn.
In reference to the quote I pulled from your post, I do not think Norman is a Bolshevik, he has a healthy hatred for deadening centralism which hurt a common dream. He is also aware of the deadly nature of fascism and its relationship to capitalism. He is not a novice to the foundation of the USA nor its current direction, nor of Israel and its aims. I think he breaks off where I do in regard to Israel, back with the views of Einstein, Arendt, and Buber. He would call himself more realistic in the two state solution at this juncture, and it is not that he would not opt from the right of return, but that he thinks it is not feasible (similar in skepticism to Chomsky).
There is a lot more we agree on than what we disagree on, but I see the one state solution in the current reality as the only alternative to the voracious nature of the Israelis. I do not believe that the right of return is out of the question and totally eclipsed or unrealistic.
Norman should be at the pinnacle of his career for which he has a passion, teaching. I go with the weight of Chomsky, Avi Shlaim, and Hilberg. With Hilberg I believe that Mr. Finkelstein will carry the weight of history with him. This is whether we are talking about what Israel doing, or the holocaust industry. If you take Mr. Finkelstein as a whole, I believe you will find a consummate grasp of what is not only taking place in the subjects he addresses, but the entire destructive course of the world order.
I’m still waiting for some criticism of Norman, or Steve Walt, or Noam Chomsky, or others.
Certainly, Phil can’t read Norman or attend his lectures and conclude that he has conveyed his conclusions as to goal well, or he facilitated an effective coalition around his goal.
On the contrary, his willingness to denounce, to offend, has harmed his own efforts.
The absence of criticism, or even of skepticism (“show me”), shows me two things:
1. That Phil self-censors in a favoritism of politicalist fashion, not an exploration of content, or pursuit of a social/political goal, not the self-declared independance. Criticism need not be personal. It can be just substantive. For Norman, any criticism though should include his willingness to call others names, or even to be primarily irritated (a political “stone in my shoe”) rather than appreciative (“lets work together” to appeal to another of my generations’ inspiring songs).
2. That the objective “eye on the prize” is lost. The most inspiring part of the story was not of the description political Mao with political Malraux, but of personal Norman with personal Palestinians.
The confusion for me in the tone is in the language (which I consider careless) even of “Israel does”. Norman can empathically sympathize with some Palestinians’ confusion of stating “Jews do” rather than “Israel does”. But, even the moniker “Israel does” is a confusion, as it was a confusion during the Vietnam War to state “America does”. (“Israel” like “America” is social, changing, a “we” not an “it”)
“Babylon system is the vampire” (Bob Marley), does not describe America and does. It does, but in describing America that way, it alienates, and evades the responsibility that we all bear to kindly co-create our world.
Perhaps you are one of those lone voices Richard, trying to recapture the old hold and criticism which amounted to fallacious conclusions for the purpose of control of Mr. Weiss in his past. Perhaps you have not read that these is now no influence to be had over him, and that the charlatan “magic” has worn off, if not I can can direct you to the post in case you missed it –
Jews aren’t smarter (I lift my curse, and yours)
So rattle the old swords as much as you like Richard, they have little to no impact.
I think it is rather novel to have a good post regarding Mr. Finkelstein, seeing that one could look up hundreds of so-called “criticisms” (most quite fallacious). The only thing most are reduced to is the petty and stupid quips that people like you are left with – “his willingness to denounce, to offend, has harmed his own efforts. ” Or other nonsense, like you do not like his “spirit,” which is like a pedantic who has no other argument, and uses as a last refuge a word misspelled or a typo to question someones scholarly and devastatingly accurate factual arguments. However, why not listen to Mr. Finkelstein as he answers his critics on the very point you make (because you have nothing else, and neither does anyone else, except their real animus that they do not like his various exposes and criticisms) -
IN DEFENSE OF ACADEMIC FREEDOM
Having seen Norman call peace advocates “nazis”, I think he has lost his tether.
You inflate Norman’s academic veracity, as you probably inflate Noam Chomsky’s.
Try skepticism.
I’m glad that Norman is an advocate of the two-state approach, as I am. In his presentation, that is minor in his math. What is major (what he dedicates the majority of his time, attention, commentary, emotion), is whether one interprets events to the same conclusions, with the same references as he.
He has not been consistent throughout his career on key issues. I saw him speak on international law, and quoted the International Court of Justice as comprising international law, when it is more like a “grand jury” or even UN attorney general. In contrast, the court’s own definition of its role is:
“The Court’s role is to settle, in accordance with international law, legal disputes submitted to it by States and to give advisory opinions on legal questions referred to it by authorized United Nations organs and specialized agencies.”
After being confronted on this exageration publicly, Norman learned and shifted his language to their actual role, not their implied authoritative role.
Its good that he learned. But, compared to the academic rigor that you attribute, it doesn’t quite measure.
To an activist, the goal is what is important. “Eyes on the Prize”. Not a particular interpretation of distant and difficult to verify “facts”. Not an exageration of interpretation to the status of “fact”.
I am glad you have such confidence in your non-factual opinions Richard, because quite frankly by what you “share” it is apparent you have not read much of anything, particularly anything that requires academic rigor (which is subjective for some). Once again you make statements not only with not knowing what my experience and background is (or being aware yet ignoring it in our exchanges), as well as misrepresenting Mr. Finkelstein’s. Your position is especially acute, because you have neither the formal foundation (going by your posts once again), nor the experiential background to make authoritative comments. To be frank, I did not want to post this, but you keep forcing the issue with these spurious screeds – now lets see if “you” are capable of learning.
Every time ‘intellectuals’ mocked the American people because of their sympathetic ears for the Jews, the more they alienate them, and sadly, the longer the true victims of Gaza wars suffer this insane tragedy…. Will we never learn and see reality?