“Today I’m coming out,” writes David Harris Gershon, endorsing BDS at Daily Kos (a piece originally at Tikkun). The title reflects the huge psychic cost involved in Jews seeming to betray their community by calling for BDS. Gershon is a liberal Zionist two-stater, whose wife was hurt in a suicide attack in 2002. He has worked with Americans for Peace Now.
The best thing about this piece is its honesty about the desperate situation that Israel and the U.S. have created in the occupation. Gershon speaks openly of ethnic cleansing, is outraged by the Levy report saying there is no occupation, and describes the apartheid status of Jews and Palestinians on the West Bank. Note that there is no tapdancing in this piece about just boycotting settlement products– no, all of Israeli political culture is off the rails.
From his conclusion:
And I think about Israel’s inability to stop the occupation on its own, about how the only way to stop it may be for outside pressures to bear down upon the country I love.
Sanctions. Boycotts. Divestments. (BDS)
These are the tools Israel and Israeli propagandists fear greatly, for they are tools with potentially sharp teeth.
And so we come to the confession, to the coming out: as an American Jew invested deeply in Israel’s success and survival — which in turn drives my investment in stopping one of the greatest moral challenges of my generation: the occupation — I have no choice but to formally endorse and embrace BDS.
That’s a difficult statement to make, for in both my personal and professional worlds, making such a statement could bring ostracization, condemnation or censure.
To some Jews, I will now (wrongly) be viewed as an enemy, as anti-Semitic, as anti-Israel. Some in my community may, upon reading this, choose to withdraw. It’s happened to others.
As it is, I have long been uncertain about supporting such measures, afraid of the long-term damage a sustained BDS movement might do to Israel, and concerned about the anti-Israel motivations of segments who push to sanction Israel.
However, I know this for a fact: those who claim in Israel that there is no occupation have only one goal in mind: a single-state solution, a Jewishly-controlled Israel stretching from the Mediterranean Sea to the Jordan River.
And here is a postscript from the author:
12:23 pm EST: I’m stunned and humbled by the response this has received. When I have time, I promise to go through and read all of the comments, and hopefully respond to some.
Thank you for the civility and for your support. I’m deeply moved.
How times change.
Wasn’t it just very recently that this site was branded as some sort of Nazi hate-site by an outraged Jewish ‘liberal’ Zionist who moonlights as the ‘poor man’s Alan Dershowitz’ on that site?
Will Daily Kos now be given the ThinkProgress treatment?
Is Josh Block (‘former AIPAC staffer’) coming out of the woodwork with a fiery email to sympathetic journalists like Ben Smith at Buzzfeed, Eli Lake at Newsweek or Dylan Byers at Politico with a damning attack on the moral miasma that is now the Daily Kos?
Interesting how fast things change from Nazi to moral englightenment.
Protip: it was never us. It was you.
I wonder if this thread could have gone ahead without support from higher-ups in the Democratic Party.
I guess we’ll find out when Gershon (aka The Troubadour) either is or is not banned from DK.
David,
As someone who has gone through a similar process, I understand the difficulty in deciding to express public support for BDS, and applaud your “coming out”. You did the right thing.
There’s one thing I don’t understand, however. You refer to “the country I love”. What is it about Israel that you love? You obviously don’t love the occupation, which has become part of the fabric of Israeli society. Since you seem to be committed to justice and equality, I also presume that you do not love the systematic inequality between Jews and non-Jews within the green line, inherent to the very concept of a “Jewish state”. You say that (Jewish) Israeli society will not transform itself and will not end the occupation without external pressure. What is there to love about such a country, such a society?
There are many people I love in Israel and I love the physical land, as well as some aspects of Israeli culture (e.g. the Hebrew language), but the inherent inequality and dispossession seem to turn just about everything else to ashes in my mouth.
“There are many people I love in Israel… as well as some aspects of Israeli culture (e.g. the Hebrew language)…”
Peoople celebrating the music, language, food, jokes, rituals and traditions associated with their nation are participating in the best that nationalism has to offer. Blood and soil nationalisms are the scurge of the earth.
… the best that nationalism has to offer
I prefer rootless cosmopolitan :-)
By Wotan, it is triple unity: blood, soil, God(s). Japanese soil, Japanese people and Amatersasu etc.
Jewish people, Jewish soil and a totally incredible amazing fellow (most recently spotted near Brooklyn) who gave them the whole place to be held irrevocably in perpetuity for some vague promise to try to upheld 600+ commandments. The guy has most wicked sense of humor. If I understand correctly, you are permitted to keep your duff on the couch on Saturday and watch TV, but … no flipping channels! And this is accomplished through small print before printing was invented (and before the Jews had any idea about electric appliances).
@ Shmuel,
Q: There’s one thing I don’t understand, however. You refer to “the country I love”.
R: it’s called ‘covering your ass’ as in ‘My best friend is a …’ I personally hate Israel and everything it stands for. Just say it/so.
“the country I love”
Love does not need reason or logic. It does not have to prevent reason or logic as David shows.
I even venture to guess that some Congresscreatures that demand tough sanctions on Cuba profess, perhaps sincerely, to love Cuba.
Given the crimes it has committed and still commits all around the world (including the support of Israel), what is there to love about America? A lot? Nothing?
Given the crimes it has committed and still commits all around the world (including the support of Israel), what is there to love about America? A lot? Nothing?
Sibiriak,
How many people do you know who are fully aware of and outraged by the ongoing crimes committed by the United States (and arguably part of its ethos) who would say “I love the country”? To the extent that some USians might be aware/outraged and still love their country, the same cannot be said of us furriners. Gershon is not an Israeli.
“Love Israel”
Standing inside the Jaffa Gate, watching the people thronging towards the Kotel, wailing wall, western wall. Mostly magical at night. This is a combination of people and place. As a rule I really don’t “like” the people, 99% religious, half and half haredi and “modern”. They impose beliefs on me, is my normal reaction, but inside the Jaffa Gate heading down through the shuk to the Kotel on a friday night or an a Tisha B’av night. I can concentrate on their politics, on their negative attitudes towards the Enlightenment or individuality, or I can put that aside for a moment and appreciate them, empathize with the moment of Tisha b’av in the old city heading to the kotel. Yes, it’s place and people and history and tribe and me viewing tribalism with a suspension of disbelief and accepting the moving pictures before my eyes for what they are.
@ Yonah
‘Accepting the pictures for what they are’? How do you do that, knowing that a hundred yards down the road there’s massive ethnic cleansing going on by your tribe?
Dutch- I feel your rhetoric is overblown, but still I accept the criticism of myself, but David Gershon has come out in favor of BDS and thus is not he allowed to combine the view inside the Jaffa Gate and love it, with his hope that BDS will yield an end to the injustices you allude to?
Note to liberal zionists (and i dont mean to be a jerk, i give this guy credit):
maybe tone it down with the “the country i love” stuff – those of us who have no manufactured sympathetic feelings toward israel have a hard time with statements like that; because to us, israel is the country that bombs civilian populations, ethnically cleanses land, arbitrarily imprisons thousands and attacks and occupies its neighbors. Nothing much to love. So, enough with the nationalism. Lets judge societies on their actions and their sentiments, without mention as to their demographics – the horror of israeli crimes is not mitigated because they are undertaken by Jews.
One last thing: How is it that anyone can say, “as a Jew” I dont support the occupation etc. and then (probably for the same reason) say they “love” Israel? In other words, Gershon, because he is jewish, “loves” Israel ( I assume he knows its history) but opposes the occupation and the current political discourse on the same grounds. Am I the only one who is really confused by this? I can’t be. I think its high time we all put our political identities down and hit the restart button, Gershon doesnt object “as a Jew” – he objects as a human being, and should have the stones to say so.
I think Gershon means “love” in the “Jerry Maguire” (love it for what it could be)/tough love/”Cultural Zionism” sense. He’s divorcing the aspirational good aspects from the egregiously bad practical aspects, seeking to preserve the former and starkly (full BDS) opposing the latter.
Reasonable people can disagree as to whether that divorce is doable or not. I believe it is, and has the potential to be a significant new driver in this debate. Liberating maybe even. The Presbys flirted with it, and ultimately, closely rejected it (this time). Gershon has described and embraced it as his mechanism of change.
More to come of this strain of thinking, imho.
@ ritzl,
Q: I think Gershon means …
R: Please don’t go there. Being a messiah is so 1st century [even if you're the tenth in succession].
@ Daniel Rich
I am not, nor is Gershon, the “Messiah.” There, now that that’s out of the way… :)
When I say, “I think Gershon means…” it is to say I have seen his evolution there from a very angry (yet reflective, even then) man who’s wife was almost killed in a terrorist attack and wanted to [paraphrased] “look into the face of evil and ask ‘Why?’ (and expect a satisfactory and affirming answer), to full-Israel BDS.
He’s been “Goldstoned” to death there as some of the comments here show, yet he came to this very public conclusion. Based on a year or so of reflection. On a Democratic Party organ/blog. And received overwhelming support for it. It’s yet another sign of change.
If my use of “Cultural Zionism” or the Z-word in general is a flag/issue, my historical parallel is McArthur’s use of the Emperor in Japan as a masthead for the democratic rebuilding of Japanese society post WWII. No fan of McArthur, but he was right to create a top-level focus for Japanese society to unify under, while completely gutting and rebuilding that political society from below/within. The Emperor was revered and served in that capacity well and successfully.
I believe (sorry) Gershon is using “love” (and potentially, Beinart, with his yet to be defined, but possibly useful “CZ” formulation) to that same purpose and effect. They are allowing/enabling continuity while seeking to rebuild underneath that. It’s the difference between slicing the issue axially/geographically (settlements v. Israel; meaningless) and radially/morally (some good, a lot bad; pursuable) with the objective of tossing out the bad stuff and crafting a better generic ethos in its place.
Are Beinart and Gershon FOS? Can’t speak to Beinart, but I don’t think Gershon is. His views represent, imho, a new seam in the discussion on how to get more people to subscribe to a process (full, or even partial BDS) that can bring enough pressure to effect justice for the Palestinians and durable peace for both the Palestinians and Israel (assuming for a sec that peace is what Israel wants, which isn’t at all apparent).
DAN CROWTHER- “So, enough with the nationalism.”
I think it is more complicated than that. When a liberal Zionist expresses love for Israel, he is, in effect, affirming his love of Jewish tribalism. Zionism and Israel more-or-less replaced Judaism as the overarching unifier of the various groups which self-identify as Jews. A splintered Judaism no longer has that ability. Liberal Zionists want to have their cake and eat it too. Israel and Zionism are a means to an end, seen as flawed but necessary, hence, the inherent problems of the “Jewish state” denied. For a Zionist to abandon Jewish nationalism is to more-or-less abandon tribalism.
…and tribalism is evil.
Not necessarily. What about indigenous groups in South America, for example, fighting for their rights of self-determination. Or what about Tibetan “tribalism”? And so on…
I’m not a member of a “tribe” myself, but I see the power of social identities all over the world, and it’s not a given to me that the world would be a better place if all those identities (“imagined communities”) were annihilated, and the world became filled with rationalistic, self-identifying individuals, especially not along the lines of the neoliberal, utility-maximizing, consumerist individual.
Let me restate that then: Jewish supremacist tribalism is evil.
Better?
Jewish nationalism, not Israeli nationalism.
You make good points Keith. I suppose I think its incumbent on the rest of us to call them out on it.
Keith- Maybe he is affirming his love of the Jewish tribe, rather than Jewish tribalism. Would that be wrong?
YONAH- Support for Israel is a manifestation of political Zionism, a means to promote tribalism and prevent assimilation. Cultural Zionism sought to preserve and honor Jewish culture and traditions and was generally opposed to a Jewish state. Hannah Arendt and Noam Chomsky are two well known cultural Zionists who opposed to the creation of Israel as a Jewish state. Political Zionism won out over cultural Zionism, hence, when we speak of “Zionism,” we are speaking of political Zionism, unless specified otherwise. When you speak of “love of the Jewish tribe,” you are conflating tribalism with Jewish culture. Zionist opposition to Israel as a state of all of its citizens is support for tribalism, pure and simple.
Keith- We started with David Gershon’s “country that I love”. You interpret his “country” as affirming the majority (green line majority) attitude of “Jewish state” rather than “state of all its citizens”. I think that is a fair differentiation, if today you are willing for Israel to call itself a “state of all its citizens”, and you are in love with Israel, you are merely in love with your tribe, but if you are unwilling, you are devoted to tribalism.
There are some who are devoted to “Jewish state” rather than “state of all its citizens” not due to tribalism but rather due to the fact that they believe that “state of all its citizens” will lead to the Jews being as scared as Christians are currently in Syria with the advance of the rebels. I assume you dismiss this fear. I do not dismiss this fear.
I completely agree with you Dan. This is all aimed at avoiding the inevitable one state solution for fear of losing their beloved “Jewish” majority. It has nothing to do with Palestinian rights (if it was they would have spoken up long ago).
Bottom line: these so-called “liberal” Zionists claim to support BDS because of their racist demographic concerns. Let us not be fooled…
as much as i usually hate paradoxical “liberal zionists” we need to not look a gift horse in the mouth, with this particular one.
i know a single democratic state is the only truly just solution (and means political zionism dies). my issue is that i do not see that option coming on the table…. for at least our natural *lives*. and justice delayed in perpetuity is justice denied. right wing zionists, wether in the state or not, can veto this end of zionism, just like they vetoed a democratic palestine about a century ago- through terrorism and violence. they can and would achieve this with relative ease.
a 2 state solution, based on 1967, with some substantive right of return for refugees is the best i can hope for. if we do not GET this, it ends in another zionist dispossession, greater israel, and gaza pushed into egypt. and an iron wall policy towards jordan (with new pal refugees), and egypt (now “holing” gaza). this is not fantasy, it is what zionist elites in israel CAN do, under the cover of a regional war and an intifada. it is likely what they plan and intend to do…. and may do.
if we someday get the HARD to get 2SS, then we can hope in time, it evolves into a porous border binational state of sorts… in decades.
those who insist on “absolute” justice here, wrt israel, will end up playing into the expansionist’s hands, and delay indefinitely a modicum of justice.
we need liberal zionists of this type, if you have any respect for the MORE PRESSING NEEDS of the millions living under occupation, apart from the refugees and those ethnically cleansed (who often, also, suffer under occupation dearly).
I agree completely.
Perhaps what you describe should be called a two-state settlement, not a solution.
A full solution will have to wait a very long time, unfortunately–until internal Israeli changes (born of struggle, internal and external pressure, the dying of old ideologies) permit a single democratic state with full individual rights, a bi-national state with collective rights, or some kind of regional confederation.
In the mean time, a two-state settlement is indeed possible, even if it seems unlikely given the “facts on the ground”.
Yes. There is a mistaken notion that if a 2SS becomes impossible, a 1SS becomes inevitable. But that’s just an article of faith.
As anonymouscomments points out, things CAN get worse–much worse–if people, in their thirst for justice, play into Israeli expansionists’ hands.
RE: “a 2 state solution, based on 1967, with some substantive right of return for refugees is the best i can hope for. if we do not GET this, it ends in another zionist dispossession, greater israel, and gaza pushed into egypt. and an iron wall policy towards jordan (with new pal refugees), and egypt (now “holing” gaza). this is not fantasy, it is what zionist elites in israel CAN do, under the cover of a regional war and an intifada. it is likely what they plan and intend to do…. and may do.”
I agree with your scenario of what zionist elites in Israel can do and likely plan, and intend to do, and may do–this is why they are pushing so hard for a war on Iran; I would add, with America carrying the weight in terms of blood and treasure. And Bibi has Mitt already committed to this war on Iran; if Bibi sees Mitt likely to win over the course of the campaign for POTUS before November, with Sheldon Adelson leading the charge of the switching American Jewish community, Bibi will then decide whether to attack Iran as the final numbers roll in putting Mitt in office, or fairly soon afterward, allowing Mitt to step into war on Iran first, or simultaneously. If Bibi sees Obama likely to win a tight race, he will attack Iran before the American election is over or force Obama to green light attack on Iran to secure the too-tight race in his favor.
Intentions aside, isn’t it a good thing that “liberal Zionists” support BDS?
These are only contradictions for a purist.
It is completely possible for someone to love North Korea and be offended by NK regime because they love North Korea. I meet many people of NK ancestry in Japan who talk exactly like this, even as NK has people literally starving to pay for the Kim regime lifestyle. Ditto Pakistan whose partition killed more than in I/P and Saudi Arabia and South Africa at the height of Apartheid. Particular love might be and was invoked in reform sentiment for each.
I love America and can continue to love America without apology because of the steps we have made away from our brutal founding and building. I am a Japan-seconder despite its many brutal doings over the years. Australia is a lovable place for many reasons. Do you know its old and even new history with the original population there? Germany is one of the most lovable places on earth. Its the future course that matters.
It seems the two state is dead so what the future of one state in I/P looks like is the only importa t thing.
TOKYOBK- “It is completely possible for someone to love North Korea and be offended by NK regime because they love North Korea.”
Even if they weren’t Korean and had never been to Korea, having lived far away for countless generations? Sounds weird to me!
95% of Koreans in Japan of heritage from what is now NK have never been there and are second and third generation “zainichi” Japanese citizens.
TOKYOBK- Three generations of Koreans hardly equates to countless generations of non-Koreans, the conditions specified in my comment concerning ‘love’ for anything experienced only as myth. You may ‘love’ the myth, but how can you love something you haven’t experienced and don’t know. This ‘love’ of the myth is more properly recognized as ideological fealty, loyalty to the group.
As for these three generations of Koreans in Japan, I don’t suppose that a goodly number of the original group were collaborators with the imperial Japanese forces which occupied Korea during WWII, who fled when the Japanese were defeated in the North? In the South, they didn’t have to flee. The US used them to form the government. They sound a lot like the Cuban émigrés in Florida who fled with the fall of Batista. Their ‘love’ consists of love for the perquisites of satraps of empire. In any event, I have always considered excessive group loyalty to be at odds with a more inclusive philosophy of brotherhood.
RE: “I have always considered excessive group loyalty to be at odds with a more inclusive philosophy of brotherhood.”
Me too. & Lacks empathy.
Also imagination:
“Walk a mile in that one’s shoes.”
Dan, that was very well said. I too am sick of the assumption that Jews by virtue of being Jewish automatically “love Israel.” I am sick of the language you always hear being said by so-called Jewish leaders who talk about how Israel should change because sometimes “even the best of friends need to show tough love” or some statement like that. Yeah “tough love” is fine, and yeah you’re right that the guy deserves credit, but it doesn’t go far enough for me. Call it what it is. An aggressive, expanionalist fascist colony that’s an outpost of U.S. Empire with a 1800s-1940s mentality. Until the Gershons of the world go there, we haven’t made any progress in ending this nightmare that Zionists have subjected humanity to.
Excellent diary . Bravo for Gershon.
And what a change for Dkos in the comments made.
I see that the aggressive zio bots have been reduced to a very few. I noticed the bots losing ground there some time ago but I visit Dkos so seldom that seeing the change today it looks monumental.
Two other interesting things in the comments 1) more Jewish commenters agreeing Israel has gone very very wrong 2) more non Jewish commenters saying exactly what they think and not being intimidated by the anti semite hurlers.
Yes things are changing.
This guy Gerhson is an interesting case of a man who ponders things and only let’s out a very selective portion of what he must know. For example, on his website he writes a piece about how, when he and his wife were having a baby, he dreaded the notion it might be a boy because he had mixed feelings about circumcision, especially since he knew he’d get his boy circumcised for sure since he was a Jew. He discussed a recent German court case of a muslim baby boy who had been mutilated, and a local German decision banning routine baby boy circumcision. He said that was very courageous of the German official responsible, considering Germany’s public history (meaning the miniscule 12 years of it under Hiter). I fail to decipher his intent on this blog article on this subject because he did not tackle the whole subject, but only the religious aspect of it, utterly failing to even mention to his readers that he might have mentioned that the USA is the only Westernized country that still does routine baby boy circumcisions, although it is a country who’s population is mostly Christian and only a tiny segment of the whole population is Jewish or Muslim. And that the US medical community has only recently confirmed that routine circumcision of baby boys has no medical health value, something the European medical community figured out many decades ago with no harm to German males (and some hot benefits) who are mostly uncut. Nor did he mention the economic aspects of the subject, that is, that in many US states, governmental funds still pay for such a painful and stupid practice performed on boy babies; only recently do hospitals even ask the parents if they want it done. Further, the barbaric practice is very lucrative, both for the hospitals, and for the cosmetic industry, which buys the foreskins to make things like skin cream for females.
Given this approach, what does his call for BDS mean? How specific, how factually based is his public change of heart, and will he tell us more about that? And, should we be happy the country he says he loves is not the USA, but Israel, any more than we should be happy he now thinks not engaging in BDS will, eventually, harm the Jews? What about harming America? What about the useless pain of all All American baby boys still subject to routine circumcision?
Just asking.
The American Medical Association opposes legal restrictions on male circumcision. “The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention is considering recommending routine circumcision for all infant boys, but the agency hasn’t issued a final decision on that front.”
The World Health Organization says “there is compelling evidence that male circumcision reduces the risk of heterosexually acquired HIV infection in men by approximately 60%.”
The AMA’s latest stance is that it opposes governmental bans on male circumcision; this is a reaction to proposals in, mostly California. To my knowledge, it has not backed off its very belated other stance that routine male baby circumcision is not a procedure that is other than cosmetic. Hence governmental funding should not be used for this purpose. The WHO’s stance is that, based on studies of African adult males with AIDS, circumcision of same reduces HIV infection when combined with using contraceptives during sexual play, and with medical drug treatment if already infected. Babies don’t usually engage in sexual penetration either in front or rear. Neither do little boys. Also many studies indicate the use of circumcision to prevent aid has not been significantly effective, and certainly is no reason to routinely circumcise baby boys.
Regardless of the public health benefits of male circumcision, I don’t know what it has to do with I/P peace and rights discussion.
Removing the “forskin” from women will most likely achieve similar health “benefits” for women. It is the same piece of anatomy. Isn’t it amazing that the US with the highest rate of circumcision has the
lowesthighest rate of HIV of europe/north america. A 60% reduction in risk is like the rhythm method. You are going to have children. The question is when. It does not translate into 60% less cases of HIV. It translates into a much smaller reduction.Israel must curtail the right to marry whom one wishes, and attend the religion of one’s choice in order to create a Jewish state. There are other requirements to keep the state Jewish. One of those requirements is that all boys must undergo at least mutilation, if not mutilation without anesthetic – torture. The individual Jew is required cast aside individual aspirations for the greater good of the Jewish faith. Judiasm first, and personal life second. Circumcision is part of the package of what makes Israel Jewish and theocratic instead of secular and democratic. Circumcision proves the willingness to sacrifice ones male children for the state.
Yes, based on 1998 WHO data of developed countries, the United States has the highest rate of HIV and also the highest rate of infant circumcision. This alone casts doubt on the utility of routine circumcision in preventing HIV infection in developed countries.
No national or international medical association recommends routine circumcision.
Only the USA circumcises the majority of newborn boys without medical or religious reason.
Medicalized circumcision began during the 1800s to prevent masturbation, which was believed to cause disease.
Today’s parents are learning that the foreskin is a normal, protective, functioning organ.
Today’s parents realize circumcision harms and has unnecessary risks.
Circumcision denies a male’s right to genital integrity and choice for his own body.
mudder, my comment was addressed to Gershon’s approach to the topic, and by analogy to his approach to the I-P conflict, towards solution.
we all need to watch closely to note the turning point … right now it is transitioning from drip-drip-drip to a trickle and before too long the trickle will transform into a flood – that will be a great day and we should all watch for it
i propose this as the new mantra:
Zionism ≠ sustain
I share Phil’s enthusiasm for stories like this.
This guy has had a kind of sea change in his life and I unreservedly applaud him for acting upon that change in a way that may well turn his entire community against him – this is once in a lifetime stuff and its probably the most you can expect from ANYONE.
Didn’t Kos have policy not that long ago banning links to MW. This has to be a big change. The comments to Gershon’s piece are even more remarkable. I looked at about 50 and saw only 2 that disagreed. Where is the hasbara army when it is needed?
Volleyboy1, head of Team Shalom, still opposes BDS. But Winston Smith, people here may be interested to learn, now supports it.
Lysis, notice that Volleyboy, aka Jon Segall, commented on another website “progressive” zionism regarding David Harris’s post:
Yep… Gershon – Harris IS the enemy. He ranks with those Jews that served as Kapo’s because they could or those who actually helped the early Nazi’s and got called “honorary Aryans”.
it would seem that Segall is more of the Masada2000/Jewish Defense League mentality more than J Street persona he pretends to be, as J Street at least tolerates Jewish Voice for Peace. (that’s not a plug for J Street, that also supports the US arming the Occupation it supposedly opposes, just using it as point of reference).
Given the level of hatred expressed by the self-described “liberals” openly on the web, i do hope that David Harris takes necessary precautions, and makes sure his life insurance is up-to-date.
Let’s not kid ourselves people: These so-called “liberal” Zionists are now coming out of the woodworks to support BDS because they worry that the status quo will lead to one, democratic state — and their biggest fear is giving Palestinians equal rights because it may cause them to lose their precious “Jewish” state.
Their entire pretext is racist. Who are we kidding here?
Kidding?? I think it is well understood that the reason liberal Zionist support Palestinian independence is for the very reason that a one state solution will lead to the demise of the Jewish state. This is explicitly stated by people like B Avishai, MJ Rosenberg and Peter Beinhart.
Quite frankly I would be sad to see the disappearance of Israel.
I am reading about those who were working to abolish US slavery. One of the things that surprised me is that the two state solution to slavery was once very popular. Eventually it lost its popularity when those opposed to slavery realized that it was being used to remove free blacks from the US and not to emancipate slaves.
This is the problem with the two state solution in Palestine. One side sees it as a vehicle to oppress Palestinians and has no interest at all in actually seeing a true Palestinian state, and never has, and never will. The object is to make the Palestinians go away and keep them subservient, not give them freedom next door. The very best that can be hoped for is that they accept a two state solution through fear.
edwin, are you referring to Liberia? If memory serves, the local blacks mostly fought the blacks coming from America; I guess that 2 state solution to slavery had the same problem, eh? Also, and agains, if memory serves, weren’t those blacks shipped from USA to Liberia mostly or totally free blacks from the North USA? That fits in with what you say as at least one reason why the plan fell out of favor.
The change in public awareness and opinion means that war on Iran may be the last hope for the zios.
The West Bank can be cleansed in one fell swoop, after a real attack from the West Bank after Iran is attacked.
The attack on Iran will be deemed “necessary”, and the cleansing of the West Bank will be another “defensive war”.
No more debate about 1 state vs 2 state, no more talk of apartheid or right of return.
Only a “complex” issue of expulsion, and “liberal” zionist calls for humanitarian aid to the millions of new refugees in Jordan.
Charles,
I only pray that ethnic cleansing will not turn to orgy of killing. Feel like a latter day Cassandra.
Eva, trying to take away my job, or what?
Prophesies of doom aside, you can trust the Israelis to do things more “surgically”, kind of like “targeted” cleansing. Whatever it is and however it is done, and when, there is a formula at work which takes into account what they can get away with. In a way, the algorithm is being tested now in the WB and Gaza. This many pogroms, doing this many bad things for this much world attention. This much white phosphorouss and Dime bombs for this long at this rate for this much Israeli support, and that much condemnation.
We can’t do anything about the israeli Grand Plan since they have it and intend to move on it – with the full support of their citizenry. What we can do something about is throw a monkey wrench in the “getting away with it” part. And that means hollering to high heaven for every single palestinian hurt, killed, arrested and going hungry. Scream holy murder for every sheep or camel shot and field burnt. The more noise we can make, the more difficult the solution(s) to the little equation become.
Re: “This many pogroms, doing this many bad things for this much world attention. This much white phosphorouss and Dime bombs for this long at this rate for this much Israeli support, and that much condemnation.”
If you study how Goebbels calculated what he could get away with before Hitler had total command of Germany, it was the same approach. Goebbels, incidentally, was a great admirer of Bernays, the guy who made smoking cigs romantic. If memory serves, he was a relation of Freud.
citizen says: If you study how Goebbels calculated what he could get away with
And look what happened. The Nazis got away with a lot for about 6 years and then they provoked world war. The result: almost total destruction of the German state, 12 million Germans expelled from their ancestral lands, the German states of E.Pomerania, Prussia and Silesia turned into Polish or Russian territory and the remaining German lands under military occupation by the four powers for a half century.
I do not think it would be wise for Israel to try to emulate that record. This is the historical precedent that progressive Zionists would like to avoid for Israel.
Danaa,
According to Electronicintifada :”Haaretz reported on Friday that Israel’s immigration police have been granted the power to remove foreigners without permits from the West Bank; this order was signed on July 6th. The Israeli occupation army has been given the power to arrest foreigners in the West Bank, move them into detention centers until deportation measures are concluded so the activists would be deported.”
Taking the difficulty of obtaining permit to go to West Bank, many people go without visa, ostensibly for no more than 48 hours, and overstay. In no time at all West Bank will be free of witnesses just as Gaza was carefully emptied of non-native witnesses, and non-native journalists, before Cast Lead.
ToivoS – no it wouldn’t be wise for Israel to emulate the Nazi state designs. Indeed, Germany “got away with it” for only a few years – until it didn’t.
But, alas, “wise” has nothing to do with it. When state actors embark on a course that is at odds to what humanity will tolerate, it is usually not because of entirely rational motives, even if there’s a rational semblance to it at first. Just as individuals can go a bit psychotic, to the point where they invite destruction, so can collectives. Happened a lot in human history. China alone is a treasure trove of what stupid hubris can beget once unleashed.
The new element with Israel is that here you have a collective that actually sets itself at right angles to “humanity”, a concept that to them (making a generalization now, obviously) bespeaks of something amorphous, misguided and kind of weak. yes, not entirely unlike the ubermenschen of old. They bought into the “to the victor go the spoils” hook, line and sinker. But what is being hijacked is not just another people’s homeland and freedom. It is history itself – along with one of humanity’s great religions – Judaism – that are under attack.
I just hope people will not be naive about what they are up against. Waking up the emotionally comatose and shaking the comfort zones of the beauty sleepers is what some of us are trying to do.
I can only hope that more will start listening to them that came from “there” and can smell the ill winds and know they are for real. Even from miles away.
So, no “wisdom” is beside the point. As is “compassion”. As is “peace”. As is “common humanity”. As is, most unfortunately, reason.
Hey Eva – still wanna go on my turf?
ToivosS, yep–that was my point; glad it did not stay only in my own mind.
Charles- There are many Israelis (too many) who would like to see the Palestinians from the West Bank disappear. But if there is a war against Iran, there will be no real attack from the West Bank, unless you mean a large suicide bombing. And if Netanyahu will be premier at the time, there will be no cleansing of the West Bank. This is just fantasy on the part of the far right wing (in Israel) and you shouldn’t let it occupy much of your time. Netanyahu’s desire to bomb Iran is a pure desire to stop an Iranian bomb and not as a means to anything else. Giora Eiland was interviewed in Haaretz this weekend on the issue and he spoke much sense. And he felt that an attack by Israel against the US wishes would be a stupid move. If Obama is reelected the US wishes will be clearly opposed to an attack on Iran until absolutely necessary (meaning at the absolutely last possible moment and possibly not even then.) If Romney wins then the situation will change, but given the economic tumult such an attack might create, President Romney might be more reluctant to throw a wrench into his economic recovery than candidate Romney lets on.
This happens at Daily Kos, and we can see, with the very high popularity of this diary at Daily Kos, that we have already won over a large part of the *rank and file* democrats and other progressives. So the upper echelons of Daily Kos tolerates the occasional diary such as this, because, in a way, they have to, otherwise they would alienate their base. But they won’t let it happen often. They have banned too many of the pro-human rights in the Middle East contingent that discussion of Israel is not really happening much there. I do believe that the Democratic Party , of which Daily Kos is a part, is unredeemable in so many ways, not just its anti-Palestinian extremism, but its pro-corporate actions, etc…. but i do have hope for the *people* of the Democratic Party. Eventually we will create alternatives, not just a new political party but a real movement on the ground. In the meantime, i am appreciative for those who raising hell from “inside”, so to speak.
a Liberal Zionist = Compassionate Conservative = Volvo with Gun rack
One more liberal self-hating Jew gets duped into opposing the existence of Israel by supporting BDS when he thinks he is just opposing the occupation of the West Bank.
>> One more liberal self-hating Jew gets duped into opposing the existence of Israel …
Funny, I didn’t see anything in the article that indicates he opposes the existence of the State of Israel. Perhaps you feel he opposes the existence of an oppressive, colonialist, expansionist and supremacist Jewish state – in that case, I can see why a hateful and immoral Zio-supremacist like you would be upset by his position.
If Israel does not exist, then somebody living there owes the USA $1 Trillion dollars, at bare minimum. And we Americans better let our Congress know since we are currently on the direct line for $11 Billion over this next ten years. We could really use this cash at home instead of pouring into a state that does not exist, or is in terrible danger of vanishing overnight.
Pro BDS=anti existence of Israel.
BDS demands right of return. Right of return means elimination of Israel. Therefore BDS = demand for Israel to cease to exist. Q.E.D.
Is it always about you? I put myself in the shoes of the abused, not the abusers as do normal human beings. They have every right to return home.
>> Right of return means elimination of Israel.
Elimination as an oppressive, colonialist, expansionist and supremacist state, perhaps. Nothing wrong with that.
>> Therefore BDS = demand for Israel to cease to exist.
Cease to exist as an oppressive, colonialist, expansionist and supremacist state, perhaps. Nothing wrong with that.
Unless, of course, you’re a hateful and immoral Zio-supremacist who prefers to see Israel remain an oppressive, colonialist, expansionist and supremacist state rather than become a secular, democratic and egalitarian state of and for all its citizens, equally.
Fredfrog
More tripe.
BDS = pro equality under the law.
Therefore, BDS seeks the end of ethno-supremacist zionism. That means the end of a multitude of deliberately discriminatory laws. What it would bring to an end are the pipe-dreams of twits like you, who don’t emigrate and fight for your supremacist state. IOW, you couldn’t just wait another 10 or 20 years for the IOF to get the job done so you could emigrate to a thoroughly ethnically cleansed land – so you’d stay in your non-supremacist, ethnically diverse US instead.
“Therefore BDS = demand for Israel to cease to exist.”
Just wanted to read that back to you.
Dignity check.
Fascists and racists like you wish Israel to remain ethnically and politically Jewish dominated by artificial means (ethnic cleansing/disenfranchisement of minorities/colonialism) so your argument has no moral standing.
Who gives a shit? Only other fascists and racists along with you. BDS is a way for ordinary people to hold your apartheid State accountable in some small respect for its crimes against an entire people who are being kept hostage.
“Right of return means elimination of Israel.”
Not a big deal. States come and go. Justice and human rights are more important than the existence of this state or that.