On August 26, Joseph Dana and I published an article, “Israel’s Exclusive Revolution,”bringing extensive reporting together with an analysis of Israel’s separation principle to describe the July 14 protest movement’s (J14) cognitive dissonance regarding the occupation. So far, no one — not one single person I know of — has responded to our article about the ongoing July 14 protests with facts of their own or anything resembling a reality-based analysis. Instead, our critics have replied with a mixture of personal attacks and emotion-laden, dreamy visions of the way things could be.
Noam Sheizaf wrote in a piece criticizing our article, “The important issue is not where the movement starts but where it leads, and in my view, this is still an open question… So there could, potentially, be mass change. This is the reason for the relative hope I see in this protest.” As with Obama’s 2008 presidential campaign, which has left most of his formerly love-struck liberal supporters feeling angry and abandoned, hope was all you needed.
It is true that there could be mass change (I presume Noam was referring to a mass Israeli movement to end the occupation of Palestine and official discrimination against Palestinian citizens and non-Jewish residents of Israel), but Dana and I did not find very much evidence that it was on the way. So we reported what we learned based on our coverage of events and interviews with key players in the J14 movement, including Palestinians. We aimed to portray J14 — and by extension, Israeli society — as it was and not as it could be.
Sheizaf, who is not only a friend but one of the better journalists covering Israeli politics, responded to me and Dana’s article by accusing us of “cherry-picking.” He did not produce any reporting or factual analysis to set us straight, however. Most disappointingly, Sheizaf felt compelled to distort our conclusions, claiming that we said “J14 was some sort of right-wing movement.” I challenge Sheizaf to produce any evidence that we wrote or even suggested that. If he can not, he should immediately retract his false claim.
On August 31, the normally insightful Gabriel Ash published a piece that read like a mimeograph of the criticisms that had already been leveled against Dana and I. After completely concurring with the substance of our analysis, writing, “Everything [Blumenthal and Dana] say about the limitations of the protest movement, I agree [with],” Ash lambasted us for not focusing on the supposed “process” of “changing Israeli consciousness.” He pointed to nothing factual to support his claim that such a process was underway and did not attempt to explain what the process was. He did no reporting and offered very little reality-based analysis. In the end, the thrust of his criticism was that we did too much reporting, and not enough dreaming about the way things could be.
When Ash attacked our reporting, he did not do so by engaging with the substance of what our sources told us, but by complaining that we talked to the wrong sources. Never mind that we interviewed some of J14’s original organizers, or that the mainstream of the protest is based on Tel Aviv’s Rothschild Boulevard. And never mind what anyone actually told us. According to Ash, the people we interviewed were not valid sources because some of them were middle class Ashkenazim. Like other critics, Ash didn’t like what we found, so he attacked us for not looking somewhere else. Then, after proclaiming his distaste for “pop psychology,” Ash accused us without any factual basis of seeking to interview only “people who are like [ourselves].” This was a comical statement considering that we featured long quotes by Palestinian citizens of Israel and based our overarching analysis on countless conversations we had with Palestinians. So was Ash saying that Dana and I are Ashkenazi Palestinians? Or was he just refusing to acknowledge the substance of what our Palestinian sources told us about J14?
For those living in a region consumed with conflict and war, the tendency to cling to irrational hopes and evanescent solutions is completely understandable. But it is also dangerous, especially when utopian aspirations are projected onto a mass movement with deliberately vague politics and clear limitations. Not all social justice movements lead the way to progressive change. In fact, some ultimately produce the reverse effect. Saul Alinsky’s Back of the Yards Neighborhood Council, which transformed into a base of support for the segregationist George Wallace’s 1968 presidential campaign, is but one example of a dramatic social movement that turned reactionary. And after just a month and half of demonstrations, some of J14’s liberal-left activists have revealed an ugly, parochial mentality that has brought the movement’s latent ethno-nationalism closer to the surface.
Just weeks after the Israeli government detained scores of international Palestine solidarity activists at Ben Gurion International Airport for declaring their intention to volunteer in the occupied West Bank, the left-wing Israeli writer Yossi Gurvitz authored an uncharacteristically incoherent screed in which he declared that the “the ad hoc alliance” with “international left-wing activists…should end.” Addressing his rant to me, Dana and Ali Abunimah (though he didn’t mention us, we were the only J14 critics he linked to), Gurvitz claimed that “we’re not dealing with leftist [sic], but Palestinian right-winger. [sic]” Gurvitz’s broadside was an extension of his outbursts on Twitter, where he has attacked Abunimah, a Palestinian whose family was expelled from Lifta in 1948, as a “foreigner inciting natives,” bizarrely comparing him to Avigdor Lieberman. When I informed Gurvitz that Abunimah’s family was ethnically cleansed and that he is not allowed to return to their home, Gurvitz gloated, “If you ask Palestinians to reject moderate positions, you should be ready to pay the consequences.” Then, stepping into the role of the New Jew who had demonstrated his authenticity by “redeeming” the land, Gurvitz tweeted at me that my criticisms were not valid because I was a “tourist.” He thus appropriated the condescending talking point that has become a hallmark of Israeli hasbara: “You have to understand, it’s very, very complicated.”
While several other left-wing Israeli activists revealed ignorant, borderline racist views in Twitter exchanges with diaspora Palestinians, Gurvitz’s outbursts were in a class of their own. Gurvitz has covered the conflict for years, garnering a sizable following of readers who enjoyed his trenchant critiques of Israeli politics and military affairs. He seemed enlightened, informed about the history of the conflict and fully aware of the oppression Israel meted out against Palestinians on a daily basis. But once the “process” of J14 began, another side of Gurvitz emerged. As soon as Abunimah and others reminded Gurvitz that a movement that officially ignored Palestinians living under occupation or in refugee camps could not expect their solidarity, Gurvitz lashed out at them with visceral, almost inexplicable loathing. How long had Gurvitz harbored so much resentment for Palestinians? No one besides him really knows. But what is clear — and utterly tragic — is that his feelings were always there, lurking just beneath the surface. And now the mask is off.
While the “process” J14 initiated may have generated positive results in some areas, it has clearly been painful for Israelis like Gurvitz. Through their interaction with activists from the outside world, Gurvitz and others have been reminded that they are not citizens of a normal society, but players in a system that dominates and oppresses millions of people. They can sense through these exchanges that the discriminatory ideology of the state of Israel is a stain on their identity, and it hurts them. But instead of casting it off and redoubling their efforts against it, they hold on to the ideology and deploy it as a weapon against those “foreign” Palestinians and “tourists” who have denied them the sense of normality they yearn for. They want the occupation to go away for a little while so they can wage their “internal” struggle in the city Gabriel Ash once labeled “Colonial Tel Aviv.” But when Rothschild Boulevard empties out and the tents disappear, it will still be there. And then, they are going to have a whole lot of explaining to do.
oh boy, we are officially having a split in the movement and this is unfortunate bummer.
i wish wish wish people wouldn’t get so emotionally charged… or at least realize when in the midst of emotionally charged situations not to always blurt stuff out.
i’m not going to get in the middle of the fight because gurvitz is a very talented writer and i already responded to his post telling him that no, we don’t need a divorce. we, being israeli and internationals fighting for the same cause, to end the occupation. sometimes people get testy or show their worst sides and whatever. he overreacted emotionally but people do that. remember when xxx went off on a tangent after the itmar murders. it just happens. argh.
as far as yours and dana’s report it was an excellent report, and you are probably right but i am going to give you an example of how something like the j14th movement can work in our favor.
the very question asked of dana, about the 9 billion, this is the big question and it’s an obvious question and it’s the question i’ve asked and the association many people have made.it’s the no brainer. it’s the question of questions and look what just happened? it got called out on that show, it gets repeated over and over. i still think the situation is in flux, even tho everything you say is true. there is going to be no ‘fix’ for israelis without taking a look at the occupation. impossible period end of story. there’s just no realistic look at israel’s economy without looking at it and that is going to become clearer and clearer with each passing day, and much more compounded because of bds.
so, israelis can ignore it but this stuff isn’t going away, the problem cannot be solved unless it is dealt with anfd the longer the protests continue, the longer the situation stays in flux, the more potential there is. so i am pro protests there.
but this split is ugly and not good for us. i’m sorry it’s happening and i am a big supporter of noam too so it is not in anyone’s best interest to rehashing all this stuff out in public but i guess it is too late for that now. yes, i have a twitter feed so i’m already aware of it. it’s all too bad. breath deep and let’s hope we can heal this.
That phrase that politics makes strange bedfellows should be supplemented by something like it also makes for very strange divorces. I read Gurvitz’s piece and it was like some hidden resentments were all coming out. As you say, people should step back and take a deep breath, but at this stage maybe egos are too heavily engaged. Can’t have anything like the greater good get in the way of that.
It has been clear for years that the Israeli left is so tiny or so contaminated with Zionism, that it has little chance of stopping the WB colonization movement. Hence, I had little hope for tent city protests. However, there was one development that I found encouraging and that was the involvement of Israeli Palestinians in the demonstrations. Apparently, in Haifa, close to half of the protesters and speakers at the rallies were Arab. That sounds promising and could grow into something interesting.
But in any case there did not seem much point in criticizing a bunch of Zionist just for being what they are. As we all should know by now the real movement is the one being led by the Palestinians and the pressure to change Israel will come from without and not within. Gurwitz’s threat to retreat further into the Israeli shell is really no threat at all considering how irrelevant people like he is in the bigger picture.
ToivoS, the left in israel is so tiny compared to the herculean task they have undertaken their role is immeasurable and should not be dismissed, any of them. gurvitz has done some great reporting. this is the same blogger who wrote Evidence undermines gov’t’s claim that terrorists were Gazans.
it’s not just gurvitz, it’s the whole left and not a one of them is a perfect human being but they are there on the ground and the idea we’re going to be ‘divorcing’ the left or that any one of them is irrelevant, is crazy talk. CRAZY.
but more importantly, and i hope everyone is listening, look at what just happened to defner. it was like a pack of wolves descending on him. i’ve been around long enough to read about these damning harsh rejections from the right wing. can we not be like that please? can we not dig a bigger and bigger holes for people to crawl out of. can we step back in this volatile time and leave a very wide open avenue for people to re calibrate, re adjust and reunite? or do we just cast people to the side and tell ourselves they are not important anyway? please. that’s all i’m saying.
What annie said.
I figure that the sight of great crowds of compatriots who neither urge “Death to Arabs” nor demand to hoist pikes with heads of traitorous Leftists is exhilirating, perhaps to the point of clouding common sense.
It may well be that when Gurwitz writes his “trenchant critiques” he is lead by his mind, and when he fires twits, he is lead by his more inner feelings, but it is very clear that his previous effort was not for fame or money. On a lighter note, someone posted a pretty ugly “tweet” on J Street web site to advertise a hatchet job on Richard Silverstein, and I understand that nowBen-Ami issued an apology and two gentlemen promised to limit mutual criticism no non-offensive words.
I understand that nowBen-Ami issued an apology and two gentlemen promised to limit mutual criticism no non-offensive words.
that’s good news.
MANY have articulated their cognitive dissonance with your reaction to the J14 demonstrations and your petty assertions about it “whining Ashkenazi”.
You are not reporting, and you know it. You are seeking to influence, or should I say stop the movement.
Its a good one. Better that you appreciate it, participate in it, and articulate what you think is important.
It looks like Mr. Blumenthal headed you off at the pass, Witty.
First Chaos, great point.
Second, now to the dreary task of answering RW. He says You are not reporting, and you know it. You are seeking to influence, or should I say stop the movement.
Nope, not at all. He is pointing out the obvious that the “movement” for “social justice” is not that at all if it does not include justice for all of Israel’s citizens. So far this movement does not include justice for the Palestinian citizens of Israel, not to mention those Palestinians under occupation.
Dana and Blumenthal have been dissing everything about the J14 movement for weeks.
The language they choose to use is insulting, vain.
It doesn’t deserve their tone. It deserves respect, participation (or not), and what a good teacher does (make connections from existing insights, if that is what they have to add).
The significance of the movement is in the making of common cause, PROVING the commonality of the peoples, that color is superficial, that ethnicity is superficial, that political ideology is superficial; compared to the common.
In making the national, the political, the sole content of their discourse (even when they pretend to talk about the “disconnect between international solidarity and Israeli domestic left”), they dismiss the commonality.
But, the human commonality is the basis of all sympathy, all solidarity. If there is a seed of that in the J14 movement, and there certainly is, then that should be the content of their thinking, the commonality, the extension of that to sympathy and good neighborliness (even if it skips the step of radical, self-abnegating forms of solidarity).
I agree with Gabriel Ash and Gurvitz and in a limited way even with you about the possible significance of the Israeli protests. Israeli racism isn’t going to vanish overnight and if it ever does go away these protests might be where the process starts.
That said, Gurvitz’s August 29 response was, in its tone, exactly what you pretend to oppose. I hope he calms down and just makes his case about the Israeli protests without any further declarations of irreparable splits. Of course you have nothing to say about that, because you’re not opposed to harsh language if it is directed at people you don’t like (such as Blumenthal).
Wittypocrisy 101:
Compare and contrast with:
See also: link to mondoweiss.net
how is that hypocrisy? they have zero to do with each other. disruption isn’t about boycotting it is about civil disobedience.
BDS is a failure, so you guys try to lump your flash dances and any sort of interruptions w/ this movement.
So now I have to get out the sock puppets for the sock puppet? Actually, I don’t care if you’re going to pretend that Witty is doing EXACTLY what he accuses Blumenthal of doing, and Witty’s been doing it for MONTHS at least.
Considering the Israeli idea of a “flash dance” is to use mortars to light a school on fire with white phosphorous and threaten the refugees that they herded EXACTLY there with their malicious so called “safety” fliers? Your idea of success is a dead child’s corpse. I’ll take my concept of success over yours any day of the week.
Of course you have nothing to say about that, because you’re not opposed to harsh language if it is directed at people you don’t like
as i recall witty was over in gurvitz’s comment section cheering on the divorce.
BDS is not a failure, in spite of what you assure yourself.
i’m sure max is quaking in his boots over this criticism from you witty.
What a silly response.
I hope Max is listening to what many are telling him, and not just ignoring it.
The fixation on the occupation as the only social/political issue to be considered, and along only predefined “which side are you on?” questions, is a small tent.
The proportions of numbers, 350,000 of Ashkenazi, Sephardi, Arab Israelis protesting social issues, compared to 5,000 max at Sheikh Jarrah demonstrations.
And, the 5000 at the Sheikh Jarrah are regarded as complicit, in not being more verbally aggressive to Israel, with the fear of Israeli peace cooptation.
The insights of connection can be made to the masses, if they are skillful, more than impatient, more than emotional.
Ever been caught in a rip-tide? I have. A rip pulled me 300 yards out to sea, and the way that I got out of it was to swim with it, diagonally, but towards a section that was not ripping out, then I could swim back to shore.
I hope Max and Joseph realize that the movement of J14, is not a riptide that they have to swim out of, but a substantive force going in the right general direction, that will result in a mutual humanization (the basis of sympathy +) AND a change in government.
They’re swimming against the river has not yeilded really any success in a long time.
The fixation on the occupation as the only social/political issue
circa civil war: argument between the north and south erupts as richard witty pronounces: ” the fixation on slavery as the only social/political/economic issue! can’t we protest our economic problems without dragging this slavery issue into it????”
witty, my point is that the occupation is not merely a ‘fixation’. it is at the root of the problem. the society cannot heal itself (it’s economic woes) without dealing with it.
one can debate the best way to come to that realization but it is pointless to assume any significant progress can be made without dealing with it. it is as integrated into the problem as slavery was to the economic inequities that instigated our civil war. that is not to say we had to fight a war to solve it but we had to end slavery to fix the problem.
zionism, like the south and it’s slavery, is sustained and dependent on free (at the expense of palestinians) land and resources. it has always been sustained either thru theft and/or industry of occupation. that theft has to be either escalated for the growing demands of the haves at the expense of the have nots or it has to end so that the eventuality of equilibrium can be attained.
any ‘fix’ not taking the occupation into account is doomed to eventual failure and is a waste of time and effort.
do you get that?
I agree that Israel cannot be fully healed without addressing the occupation.
And, the point that common cause between Ashkenazi, Sephardi, Arab Israelis, IS dealing with the occupation, in speaking of “one community”.
I am stating that in not supporting and encouraging that very positive spirit, Dana and Blumenthal have been supporting the opposite of that spirit.
In contrast to many of their colleagues.
In this pregnant September, they could have even just continued writing about the occupation, about the Palestinian petition, about Sheikh Jarrah and Beilin and others. And, they could have invited some of the 350,000 to participate in those efforts, thereby doubling or tripling or adding a 0 to the 5000 weekly at Sheikh Jarrah (if that much).
They got fixated, bitter as Yossi Gurvitz described.
I agree that Israel cannot be fully healed without addressing the occupation……..And, the point that common cause between Ashkenazi, Sephardi, Arab Israelis, IS dealing with the occupation, in speaking of “one community”.
richard, do you notice how you used the term “addressing the occupation” when you agreed with me and then switched to ‘IS dealing’ when referencing what the protesters were doing. can you say And, the point that common cause between Ashkenazi, Sephardi, Arab Israelis, IS addressing the occupation, in speaking of “one community”. ?
or is your point that in speaking as “one community” they are dealing with it by not addressing it?
“I agree that Israel cannot be fully healed without addressing the occupation.”
But don’t be surprised that people don’t give a shit about Israel’s self-fufillment when Palestinians are still getting their teeth kicked in.
“But don’t be surprised that people don’t give a shit about Israel’s self-fufillment when Palestinians are still getting their teeth kicked in.”
There’s a difference between not giving a shit about the protests and outright opposing them. I don’t expect anyone who isn’t an Israeli to care about internal Israeli issues and to join the J14 movement. But why go out against it and try to paint it as an evil racist movement?
Witty, I’m sure Max and Joseph are busy doing real work on this conflict. They won’t waste their time with a troll like you.
link to haaretz.com
Israelis, go protest!
Saturday the power of a society will be tested – a society that has finally come alive and grown up after decades of slumber.
By Gideon Levy
A good link, Richard. Of course Levy would be in favor of all Israelis protesting against Israeli war crimes too, but he will take what he can get, hoping it leads to better things. I doubt you’d protest against Israeli war crimes. You usually defend them here.
You usually defend them here.
war crimes? what war crimes? the sanitizer… the neutralizer, he denies them!
I don’t think that its “taking all he can get”.
Its just, “do I support this or do I not?” YES
A meaningless retort, Richard.
So you don’t think Gideon Levy hopes that this movement broadens into one that is also against the occupation? You think he’s just cheering on a purely internal Israeli development, sorta like (using Annie’s analogy), the North and South getting together on the issue of tariffs while ignoring the issue of slavery?
I believe that Gideon Levy observes multiple problems that are both distinct and related at the same time.
I believe that he feels support for the liberatory sentiment, the same sentiment as never again (speaking up for one’s dignity), and feels great support for the willingness to listen to each other and to address real current conditions.
Dana and Blumenthal have expressed an exclusive approach to the social/political problems. I don’t believe that Levy does.
An ‘exclusive approach’ is Dick Witty’s support for the Nakba, ethnic cleansing of Palestinians and for the settlements in Palestinian land, by Jewish colonists.
You have no moral standing. That’s why you were censored on Richard Silverstein’s blog.
The only reason you’re allowed to pollute Mondoweiss with 10K posts while slandering your supposed friend, Phil Weiss, is because ‘liberal’ Zionism is apparently as much a joke as you are.
I oppose the nakba that is still occurring. The nakba that occurred in 1948 was accompanied by the independence, the liberation, of the Jewish community.
So, I primarily celebrate, and acknowledge that others were affected badly, and that that requires healing, not war.
You think that I “slander” Phil Weiss? At original e-mail discussion of my posting here, Phil insisted that I speak candidly and honestly.
What is this supposed to mean? That the ethnic cleansing was justified?
You support ethnic cleansing of Palestinians and continued settlement of Jewish colonists.
You’re like that crazy Christian pastor who hates gay people. Completely confident in your hatefulness.
Witty:
So what? I’m sure at the very least Phil expected that you would post here in good faith. Look how that turned out.
>> RW: The nakba that occurred in 1948 was accompanied by the independence, the liberation, of the Jewish community.
>> So, I primarily celebrate …
Love it! This one’s another keeper.
Palestinian: ‘Mr. Witty, do you acknowledge the suffering of my people during the Nakba?’
RW: ‘Yes, I do acknowledge it. However, since it was accompanied by the independence of the Jewish community, I primarily celebrate.’
Palestinian: ‘WTF?! What kind of man celebrates the suffering of others?!’
RW: ‘I’m a “humanist”. I believe in “live #and# let live”! Peace, not “justice”, I always say!’
I post in good faith. You?
Posting in good faith means backing up your claims with linsk to course, which you are notorious for refusing or failing to do.
POsint in good faith means answering questions directly when you are asked, not evadign them a dozen times over by resposnding with another question or ignring the question altogether.
If you were posting in good faith, you would have answer me right away as to whether you agree with Steven Walt’s statement that Cast Lead was morally bankrupt, and if so, explained why you supported a morally bankrupt action.
If you were posting in good faith, you would have responded right away to Sumud’s request for a link to the source that proves BDS changed their stated agenda or goals in 2005.
You have done none of these Witty, hence you are not posting in good faith. That is why we have all requested the ignore button; so what none of us who have wanted hudrends of posts trying to converse with you, will no longer have to tolerate your bad faith thread jacking any more.
So between now and when Alec implements this feature, you have a choice Witty. Either clean up your act or accept that you will be completely ignored in the future.
Richard Witty said, “I know you are, but what am I?”
h/t to the inventor of Witty-interpretation, James North, as always.
Max, you’ve reported from just one place – the tents at Rothschild Blvd. Sure, it is where everything started and where the self-appointed leadership is from, but this is essentially a leaderless, decentralized movement. There are many other Tent Cities around Israel (even Tel-Aviv has more than just the Rothschild tents), with each Tent City having a slightly different focus and approach, based on local needs and interests. Not only do the different Tent Cities not agree on a central list of demands, even the “leadership” is divided.
As for the inclusion of the plight of Palestinians in the movement: Yes, it is true that Gazans and West Bankers are not part of the call for social justice, but Arabs citizens are. At least two major protests that I know of had Palestinian citizens of Israel as speakers. Also, take the Be’er-Sheva tents, for example. It was the first Tent City outside of Tel-Aviv and one of Israel’s largest. The Negev’s Bedouins and their needs are a central issue at this encampment.