At NY premiere, David Grossman will join Netanyahu minister who boycotts Darwish

US Politics
on 72 Comments

Liberal Zionist icon David Grossman and Netanyahu’s culture minister, Miri Regev of the Jerusalem dress, are joined in a delegation to a New York theater later this month. Zionism sure makes strange bedfellows. Or more to the point: When are liberal Zionists going to tell the settler movement to f— itself?

Here’s the story. From July 24-27, Lincoln Center will be staging four productions of a play based on David Grossman’s doorstop novel, To the End of the Land. The production is being sponsored by the Israeli government as part of its Brand Israel campaign; and the two theater companies collaborating in the show have both performed in settlements. Seventy cultural figures have called on Lincoln Center to cancel the performances.

Just to be clear, there is another Israeli play on tap at Lincoln Center to which the artists have no objection. It’s the government sponsorship that’s the issue. Here is a story about the production/protest in Haaretz (as translated from the Hebrew by Adalah NY):

“A Woman Running From News” [Original Hebrew title for the English play “To the End of the Land”], adapted and directed by Hanan Snir based on David Grossman’s book, deals with a woman who sets out on a journey across Israel with her old flame, in an attempt to escape the news of the fate of their son, who was drafted for Operation Defensive Shield…. A delegation of representatives of the management of the two theaters will accompany the ensemble and Grossman on their journey to New York, and will be joined by Minister of Culture and Sport Miri Regev.

Who is Miri Regev? Well just two months ago she walked out of a Tel Aviv performance rather than hearing an Israeli Palestinian read a tribute to the Palestinian poet Mahmoud Darwish.

Regev is famous as a Likud hatchet-person. Five years ago she compared Sudanese immigrants to Israel to a “cancer in our body.” People pointed out that similar things were said about Jews in Europe. Regev apologized.

One thing she’ll not apologize for is support for Israeli settlements. In May Regev appeared at the Cannes film festival in a Jerusalem dress: it had an image of the occupied Old City on its skirt, letting the world know that Israel will never let go of Jerusalem.

Regev in Jerusalem dress at Cannes Film Festival, May 2017

Grossman is a leader of the cultural opposition to settlements in Israel. He’s demonstrated against them and been beaten for doing so. He withdrew his name from a prestigious Israeli prize competition after Benjamin Netanyahu tried to remove judges who he alleged were anti-Zionist.

Earlier, Grossman joined the boycott of Ariel settlement, where Habima and Cameri, the theater groups now performing his book as a play, appeared repeatedly.

Last year Grossman told Moment that Regev was making a “fascist” demand of writers to be loyal to the state. Then said he did not need the state’s funding:

They want me to give unquestioning support to everything they are doing. They want me to sing with their choir.

Furthermore, they never funded me. I have never needed their funding. On the contrary, because I am quite widely translated, I bring a lot of foreign currency to Israel. But there are artists and writers who need government funding. The country has a serious obligation and duty to fund and support diverse opinions. This is the spirit of democracy, and we should take pride in the fact that Israel is a democracy. But Israel is now a declining and deteriorating democracy. This, unfortunately, is one of the results of the long state of war. It is not only the Palestinian and Israeli people who suffer from the situation; Israeli democracy itself suffers because of it.

The government wants us to be loyal to a very narrow part of being an Israeli.

Why is he in a delegation with Regev? Hard to say. A play like this needs a lot of subsidy; it’s surely important for Grossman to be in New York. And Miri Regev promoted Grossman when he recently won the Man Booker Prize.

Then, too, Grossman is a committed Zionist who would seem to hold the nations outside Israel in some suspicion. He told Charlie Rose that the “option that terrifies us all the time… which really freaks me out” is to think that after 62 years of independence, sovereignty, and military strength, “there might be an end to this country.” He told Max Blumenthal in Goliath that Zionism is necessary because “For 2000 years we have been kept out, we have been excluded, and so for our whole history we were outsiders. Because of Zionism, we finally have the chance to be insiders.” When Blumenthal said he knew a lot of Jewish insiders in the U.S., Grossman had no answer.

The novel To the End of the Land evidently reflects a belief in the necessity of Zionism. Patricia Storace wrote in the New York Review of Books that Grossman’s vision was of a “modern state… founded on a timeless destiny….” and his story reflected “a doctrinal national memory.”

Thanks to Ofer Neiman.

About Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is Founder and Co-Editor of Mondoweiss.net.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

72 Responses

  1. JosephA
    July 12, 2017, 7:37 pm

    Miri Regev sounds like a rather terrible human being.

  2. yonah fredman
    July 12, 2017, 9:28 pm

    About Miri Regev’s dress. The Likud party will not cede control of the Temple Mount.

    About David Grossman. Maybe those who have read more history are comfortable talking about 2000 years of history. I know some headlines, but I don’t know the deeper story. I know that when my grandparents fled Eastern Europe that was a smart move. and I know the incredible abyss created by the Shoah and the need to respond to that abyss. Zionism is one response. It is an insufficient response, but it is one response.

    About boycotting the performance of this play. No one is stopping you from boycotting. How many people in this comments section have read one book by Oz, Yehoshua and Grossman. How can you have a war of ideas if you have not read them?

    It is so safe and warm (for you antizionists) in the cocoon of mondoweiss. it is certainly not a war of ideas. it is a repetition of cant over and over. and a choice to ignore a certain period of years in Jewish history and to pretend that American Jewry circa 2017 is the be all and the end all of the story. zionists may be myopic to focus on the abyss. mondoweiss is blind and devoted to ignoring other views of jewish history other than the assimilationist view.

    • talknic
      July 13, 2017, 2:04 am

      How can you have a war on ideas if you ignore the facts? Fact is Israel is illegally colonizing territories acquired by war.

      • Talkback
        July 13, 2017, 5:50 pm

        Talknic: “Fact is Israel is illegally colonizing territories acquired by war.”

        Of course this excludes the 6% territories of historic Palestine that were acquired with money.

    • RoHa
      July 13, 2017, 6:03 am

      “I know that when my grandparents fled Eastern Europe that was a smart move.”

      A smart move for lots of Eastern Europeans, Gentiles as well as Jews. But that was your grandparents, not you.

      “and I know the incredible abyss created by the Shoah”

      Even though it was over well before you were born.

      “and the need to respond to that abyss. Zionism is one response.”

      Even though Zionism long preceded the Shoah. But I suppose you mean that the Shoah pushed some people towards Zionism. Well, maybe that was a response, but it was an evil response.

    • eljay
      July 13, 2017, 7:22 am

      || yonah fredman @ July 12, 2017, 9:28 pm ||

      That is certainly not a war of ideas. It is a repetition of apologetics over and over for the deliberate acts of injustice and immorality – the past and on-going (war) crimes – committed by Zionist Jews in the name of Jewish supremacism in/and a religion-supremacist “Jewish State” in as much as possible of Palestine.

      || … I know the incredible abyss created by the Shoah and the need to respond to that abyss. Zionism is one response. It is an insufficient response, but it is one response. … ||

      Right, and becoming a serial rapist is merely “an insufficient response” to an abusive childhood. You Zionists truly are morally deficient.

      • YoniFalic
        July 13, 2017, 9:43 am

        I wish eljay would stop calling Israel religion-supremacist. If my family in Israel has a religion, it is an ethnic fundamentalism that combines extreme ethnic chauvinism with worship of the state and with obsession about the Holocaust.

        God does not play any part.

        When I first started seriously to study Nazi Germany, I read Claudia Koonz’s book entitled The Nazi Conscience.

        I was stunned when I realized that the author described exactly the mentality with which we Israeli invaders were inculcated.

      • Keith
        July 13, 2017, 10:04 am

        YONI FALIC- “When I first started seriously to study Nazi Germany, I read Claudia Koonz’s book entitled The Nazi Conscience.”

        From the Google book description: ” In fact, the perpetrators of genocide had a powerful sense of right and wrong, based on civic values that exalted the moral righteousness of the ethnic community and denounced outsiders.”

      • Bont Eastlake
        July 13, 2017, 11:18 am

        The use of the term “religious-supremacist” as a basis to criticise Israel is so problematic in my view.

        1. Israel primarily use the Westphalian nation-state model as their political framework, that is very similar to other European and Anglo countries. Religious elements exists only as superficial garnishing of what essentially is a secular, human-centric state infrastructure. Religion is far from being supreme in Israel…unless we consider Zionism is a religion.

        2. It ignores the vast array of documented grievances many parties have against Israel that are not based on religious issues. The Nakba for example, was a political act to secure valuable land and resources from a civilian population through armed state violence. Religion had nothing to do with it.

        3. It ignores the intersectionality of violence between Israel and its many secular, Western allies, who directly benefitted from Israeli policies and actions. These countries, namely the UK, Canada, Australia, USA and to a lesser extent France, directly and deliberately colloborated with Israel in foreign policy, diplomatic relations with the UN, economic and military cooperation out of secular, materialist objectives. Many Arabs and Palestinians who are against Israel are Christians btw, like the Americans and Canadians who are fighting alongside the “Jewish-supremacist” state.

        4. The term religious-supremacist just makes no sense in this day and age when science and materialism forms the basis of all political entities. When I think of a religious-supremacist country, I think of a class of devout monks and shamans running it, not a bunch of clean-cut, professional looking men in tailored suits and uniforms.

      • eljay
        July 13, 2017, 12:12 pm

        || YoniFalic: I wish eljay would stop calling Israel religion-supremacist. … ||

        Jewish is a religion-based identity. A “Jewish State” of Israel – a state primarily of and for Jewish Israelis and non-Israeli Jews – is a religion-supremacist state.

        || … God does not play any part. … ||

        None at all…except for every time a Zionist appeals to God and/or the Bible to justify his evil.

      • echinococcus
        July 13, 2017, 1:57 pm

        Eljay,

        You keep repeating yourself without even once getting into the objections that have been raised, many times, to your strange characterization.

        Of course “Jewish” is not in any way or wise a “religion-based” identity, anywhere in Palestine or even among the majority of people who identify themselves as “Jewish”. It is a racist identity, in that it is not based on any reality of “race” but a racist belief by those who identify as such that they belong to the same tribe, or the same chosen clone, or at the very least that they share some common spiritual identity/culture.

        Of course it is a purely racist identity, not religious, in that the foundation of Zionism, mainly by atheists, is founded not on religion but a rejection of religion and religiosity in the name of a rabid fake nationalism (lotsa imagined Blut and no Boden.)

        You can’t even be bothered to look at how the Zionist entity calling itself “State of Israel” defines “Jewish”, its master race. It’s all freely acknowledged by the Zionists themselves.

        I bet you half a nickel that you’ll continue parroting the same few phrases without ever responding to reasoned objection.

      • eljay
        July 13, 2017, 2:19 pm

        || echinococcus: Eljay, blahblahblah … “Jewish” is not in any way or wise a “religion-based” identity … blahblahblah ||

        As far as I know, there are only two ways of acquiring the identity of Jewish:
        – undergoing a religious conversion to Judaism; and
        – being descended from someone who underwent a religious conversion to Judaism.

        But, sure, whatever you say.

      • Mooser
        July 13, 2017, 5:32 pm

        ” You Zionists truly are morally deficient.”

        Not so. They have the morals appropriate to their absurd fantasies of Zionist power. Who can gainsay the tide of history?

      • Mooser
        July 13, 2017, 5:51 pm

        “Jewish”. It is a racist identity, in that it is not based on any reality of “race” but a racist belief by those who identify as Jewish”

        Geez, that’s bad. Thank God no part of that racist identification process has ever fallen under non-Jewish control! Shudder to think what might have happened in that case.

      • Bont Eastlake
        July 13, 2017, 7:59 pm

        Eljay,

        I just don’t get whats the game your playing here. So of all things, your against Israel because its full of Jews?

        Jewish identity is not a monolith, it is one layer of many within people who associates with the faith. It doesn’t erase the various other layers like race, ancestry, gender, sexuality, social and economic class, language, family ties and so on. Even within the Jewish layer there is a whole spectrum of beliefs and theological ideas that often contradicts Zionist stereotyping of the faith.

        Being Jewish alone won’t save you from being a victim to Zionist machinations, like many Jewish folks in MW can attest to. Nor does it automatically make you complicit in Israeli crimes.

      • eljay
        July 13, 2017, 8:51 pm

        || Bont Eastlake: Eljay,

        I just don’t get whats the game your playing here. … ||

        The only game here is yours, Zionist troll, and I’m not going to play it.

      • echinococcus
        July 13, 2017, 9:15 pm

        Eljay,

        Look at your “response”, then at what you are avoiding to respond to.
        Should the conclusion be that you are unable to understand human language?

      • Mooser
        July 13, 2017, 9:23 pm

        “The Jewish race has “retained its integrity” because it was believed that the Jews possess “the holy seed”

        You know what really scares me? What if we identify ourselves as a people, or even a race, and the people we live amongst refuse to do that!!!
        I don’t even want to think about the possible consequences of being rehumanized like that.

      • eljay
        July 13, 2017, 9:35 pm

        || echinococcus: Eljay, blahblahblah ||

        Sure, whatever you say.

      • Bont Eastlake
        July 13, 2017, 10:54 pm

        Eljay, a white guy from Canada with no known proof of qualifications about anything…knows more about Jews than Jewish people, Israel than Israelis, Middle Eastern politics than Middle Eastern politicians.

        You should be in the running for president of the world, instead of wasting your white superpowers on the lowly folks of MW.

      • MHughes976
        July 14, 2017, 3:19 am

        Isaiah 6:13 in the standard reading refers to the holy seed more as what the Israelites are than as what they possess. The ugly stump that has survived the forest fire is the seed from which, presumably, a mightier and more beautiful tree will grow. Thus we see, friends, that it was in ancient Israel that the theory of natural selection, along with the 21st century principle that whatever doesn’t kill you makes you stronger, was first discovered.

      • eljay
        July 14, 2017, 8:39 am

        || Bont Eastlake: Eljay, a white guy from Canada … ||

        Bont / silamcuz / a4tech / rugal_b, a Zionist troll pretending not to be one.

        You’re funny. :-)

      • MHughes976
        July 14, 2017, 9:17 am

        I’d say that Israel does give supremacy or at least crucial and massive privilege to a rather strangely disparate group of people practising the Jewish religion or related by blood to those who do or did – so religion enters into their understanding of what the top group is. Supremacist in that sense. But there is no need for members of that group to be religious, indeed for a time it was at least highly fashionable to make a display of atheism. So supremacy without religion in that sense. One of the keys to the success of Z has been the remarkable and unique ability to survive at almost every point of the religious and political spectrum.

      • Bont Eastlake
        July 14, 2017, 9:55 am

        MHughes,

        You are describing Zionism, a man-made political ideology, not a religious theology. So Jewish people are given privileges in Israel at the expense of others. But here, as you as said yourself, they are given meaning there is another class of people above them that enables this arrangement to take place. Are the givers of privilege more Jewish than the receivers?

        I still dont see how this is a religion-supremacist set up. There is nothing superior about having to beg for privileges from the state using religion. In fact, its more of a blackmail dynamic, like you must believe in so and so if you want to keep your house, your job etc.

      • Mooser
        July 14, 2017, 12:22 pm

        “As far as I know, there are only two ways of acquiring the identity of Jewish:”

        Yup, you said it, “Echin”, there’s only two ways: The first one is to say: “I’m a Jew” and the second is somebody saying: “He’s a Jew”.

      • Mooser
        July 14, 2017, 12:35 pm

        ,“Eljay, a white guy from Canada… instead of wasting your white superpowers”

        Not a problem you will ever have, “Bont”. You are patently transparent.

      • Mooser
        July 14, 2017, 2:50 pm

        “It doesn’t erase the various other layers like race, ancestry, gender, sexuality, social and economic class, language, family ties and so on.”

        And a person’s class will always reveal itself, there’s no hiding it. It’s easy to pick out the intelligentsia, bourgeoisie, and kulaks for arrest and trial. There’s no need to go by religion or national origin.

      • eljay
        July 14, 2017, 3:37 pm

        || Mooser: “As far as I know, there are only two ways of acquiring the identity of Jewish:”

        Yup, you said it, “Echin” … ||

        That one was mine.

        || … there’s only two ways: The first one is to say: “I’m a Jew” and the second is somebody saying: “He’s a Jew”. ||

        That somebody will be the Zionists who wish to redirect blowback away from themselves when the “Jewish State” experiment collapses.

      • echinococcus
        July 14, 2017, 4:37 pm

        And the 2 ways indicated by Eljay for “becoming a Jew” are totally irrelevant to the Zionist crime, which has nothing to do with religion. So totally irrelevant that they are part and parcel of Zionist fake-racial propaganda. As for the 2 indicated by Mooser, they are the same when practiced by the Nazi and when practiced by the Zionists. Because the latter, being earlier around as a political movement, gave it to the former.

      • echinococcus
        July 14, 2017, 4:43 pm

        Hughes,

        But there is no need for members of that group to be religious, indeed for a time it was at least highly fashionable to make a display of atheism. So supremacy without religion in that sense

        But in that sense, i.e. for purposes of defining a group of people (=the Master Race), there is a need for one definition fitting the group. So logically you cannot have both a non-religious (barely-religion-tolerating) group and an entirely religion-practicing group at the same time. No can do.

        Calling a totally political action (whatever it is, in fact, and even if no non-religious were not participating) “religious” is misleading.

      • echinococcus
        July 14, 2017, 4:57 pm

        | Bont Eastlake: Eljay, a white guy from Canada … ||
        Bont / silamcuz / a4tech / rugal_b, a Zionist troll pretending not to be one.

        You know, Eljay, you might be right.

        But you are not even pretending. Your goal is to keep the Zionist invader varmint in Palestine (provided they fit your liberal American trendy idea of fraternity) at any cost, and you fiercely oppose justice and restitution of Palestine to its owners. And playing dead to all specific objections.

        You’re funny. :-)

      • Mooser
        July 14, 2017, 6:06 pm

        “That one was mine.”

        My mistake. Apologies to both.

      • eljay
        July 14, 2017, 6:14 pm

        || echinococcus: … You know, Eljay, blahblahblah ||

        Sure, whatever you say.

      • MHughes976
        July 15, 2017, 8:22 am

        The characteristics ‘practising a certain religion’; ‘being close in blood to those who practise it’ are different but not conflicting, merely disjunctive: the same person could qualify both ways. It seems to me completely intelligible and understandable a) to say that a system ascribing ‘ supremacy’ to members of this disjunctively defined group is ‘religion supremacist’ b) to believe that this sort of supremacy is wrong either because all supremacy is wrong or else because it is morally impossible to ascribe rights on such an arbitrary basis or on both these grounds.
        A belief in religion supremacy doesn’t have to be itself a religious belief – it may be defended on grounds of social utility. If it is clearly based on religious belief, ie the religion implies its own supremacy, there is scope for objection. It is to be expected that membership of the supreme group is closely guarded by its generally recognised members. You may not want to share supremacy more widely than you really have to.
        Terms and phrases come not only through strict definitions but through an umbra of associations and suggestions. I think eljay is being harshly treated when his meaning is completely intelligible as a matter of definition and also, when it comes to associations and suggestions, useful in reminding us that the role of religion in Israeli life is surely rather greater than Israel’s liberal admirers might have us think. However, there are misleading associations as well, since everyone knows that professed atheists can do well in Israel. ‘Religion supremacist’ isn’t a rhetorical weapon which causes dismay on the other side, rather dissension on ours.

      • eljay
        July 15, 2017, 9:50 am

        || MHughes976 @ July 15, 2017, 8:22 am ||

        Thanks for chiming in, MHughes976. Bont/ococcus continues intentionally to distort my words and to blatantly lie about things I have said (e.g., I haven’t said or suggested that all people who choose to be/come Jewish are religious).

        What I have said is this:

        1. Jewish is a religion-based identity. As far as I know:
        – it is not a bureaucratic nationality;
        – it cannot be acquired simply by being born in Israel;
        – it cannot be acquired by adopting Jewish dietary habits or embracing Jewish culture; and
        – it can only be acquired through religious conversion to Judaism or by descent from someone who underwent a religious conversion to Judaism.

        2. The self-proclaimed “Jewish State” of Israel is a religion-supremacist construct because it was devised and established and is maintained as a state primarily of and for people throughout the world who choose to hold the religion-based identity of Jewish.

        And now over to Bont/ococcus for further lies and distortions.

      • echinococcus
        July 15, 2017, 12:00 pm

        Eljay,

        All your points are totally, absolutely irrelevant to the discussion.
        Except perhaps your absurd contention that there can be a “Jewish” identity that

        can only be acquired… by descent from someone who underwent a religious conversion to Judaism

        which is the insane theory of Zionists and similar Jewish-nationalists (who of course don’t mention the conversion angle.)

        The Ottoman Sultans may have agreed with you, while even the most bloodthirsty religious crusaders of antiquity or the middle ages had already come off that nonsense: they spared the life of those who converted to fit their requirement.

        The basis for belonging to the Master Race is purely racist (I won’t use the term “racial”, as heredity here over more than several generations is mythical only) as no religious test is required from those born from a Jewish woman. As is the basis for the people to marked for destruction for being owners of the territory: their ancestry, not their religion.

        [Also note that conversions are irrelevant past the middle ages because they were no longer accepted –until Zionism became fashionable.]

      • eljay
        July 15, 2017, 12:27 pm

        || echinococcus: Eljay, blahblahblah ||

        Sure, whatever you say.

      • echinococcus
        July 15, 2017, 12:32 pm

        Hughes,

        The characteristics ‘practising a certain religion’; ‘being close in blood to those who practise it’ are different but not conflicting, merely disjunctive:

        With you so far,
        but

        the same person could qualify both ways

        is wrong: it’s one-way only: while the religious person may have, and often has, blood ties to others who practice, the blaspheming atheist born to a devout religious family is emphatically not religious.

        It seems to me completely intelligible and understandable …to say that a system ascribing ‘ supremacy’ to members of this disjunctively defined group is ‘religion supremacist’

        …as long as a belief/practice test is required to restrict the group to religious persons (with or without blood ties to other practicing persons.)

        Calling it religion-supremacist when no such test is required camouflages pure racist discrimination, just as is done by the Zionists (or the Turks in 1922, etc.)

        For the benefit of the likes of Eljay, let’s also note that the term “racism” is used in its civilized consensus denotation, that of group discrimination based on any inborn characteristic. That includes the presence or absence of persons of a given religion in one’s ancestry.

      • echinococcus
        July 15, 2017, 1:41 pm

        Eljay,

        Think of it, it may be worth noting one more thing.

        (e.g., I haven’t said or suggested that all people who choose to be/come Jewish are religious)

        Of course you haven’t! I am the one saying that to be called* “Jewish” you necessarily must be religious. You are being called for NOT observing such a huge distinction. For subscribing to the racist Zionist propaganda definition that considers religion irrelevant to the definition of “Jewish”, at least for the purposes of invading and illegally squatting in Palestine.

        As I already said, you continue repeating the same irrelevant statements, without wondering even once about what people are objecting.

        ——
        *by people who follow the current civilized consensus on the definition of religion

      • Talkback
        July 15, 2017, 3:17 pm

        eljay: “Sure, whatever you say.”

        I call that an intellectual capitulation.

      • Talkback
        July 15, 2017, 3:20 pm

        Mooser: “My mistake. Apologies to both.”

        Oh boy, Nathan is going to flip out when he finds out.

      • eljay
        July 15, 2017, 3:47 pm

        || echinococcus: … I am the one saying that to be called* “Jewish” you necessarily must be religious. … ||

        And now we finally know who is the official authority on Jewishness.

      • eljay
        July 15, 2017, 3:50 pm

        || Talkback: eljay: “Sure, whatever you say.”

        I call that an intellectual capitulation. ||

        I’m not intellectual, so it wasn’t much of a capitulation. :-)

      • eljay
        July 15, 2017, 3:51 pm

        || Talkback: Mooser: “My mistake. Apologies to both.”

        Oh boy, Nathan is going to flip out when he finds out. ||

        Wait a minute…was I supposed to get all offended and stuff? ;-)

      • Mooser
        July 15, 2017, 4:11 pm

        Anyway, there’s one thing I’d like to know. Are we discussing what makes a person identify themselves as Jewish, or why a person should be or shouldn’t be identified as Jewish by others?

      • Jon66
        July 15, 2017, 6:05 pm

        Echi,
        Just a side note, but putting the word “civilized” in front of a statement doesn’t necessarily means it’s true.

      • echinococcus
        July 15, 2017, 6:15 pm

        Good question, many times asked, Mooser.

        Religion is religion, and once you pull that (and liturgy-related gobbledygook) away, there is nothing left that can be called common culture or common anything at all.

        So let’s try to guess how come it’s only the Nazis and the Zionists (and the religious fanatics) who have the same definition that ignores the common concept of religion.

        As for what one calls oneself, who cares? There’s no law against misleading names… like “Department of Defense”, say.

      • echinococcus
        July 15, 2017, 8:04 pm

        But of course, Sixty-six; your idea of “civilized” cannot be but a bloody, putrid, nauseating cloaca and I don’t give a rat’s behind what the word might evoke in your cavemen’s skulls. I was talking to what I hope are civilized people, who can be non-Zionists exclusively.

      • Bont Eastlake
        July 15, 2017, 10:31 pm

        MHughes,

        If the privileges are given, by a non-supernatural actor then religion is no longer the controlling factor in this arrangement. Religion in my understanding refers to the collective beliefs and practices that is done in order to gain favors from supernatural forces, namely God in the context of monotheistic religions like Judaism.

        A religion-supremacist state would be governed strictly through religious texts and beliefs that are held by every member of said state. A religion-supremacist state in theory should be a good thing.

        In Israel you can be a devout Jew but your privileges are still bound to the policies and law crafted in the secular branches of the government and judicial system. In fact, your strong religious conviction may serve against you in Israel if your interpretation of Judaism contradicts the official state ideology.

      • Talkback
        July 16, 2017, 5:44 am

        Mooser: “Anyway, there’s one thing I’d like to know. Are we discussing what makes a person identify themselves as Jewish, or why a person should be or shouldn’t be identified as Jewish by others?”

        We are discussing who has a right to return to a state which keeps failing to officially define what a “Jew” or a “Jewish” state is.

      • Mooser
        July 16, 2017, 1:05 pm

        “Just a side note, but putting the word “civilized” in front of a statement doesn’t necessarily means it’s true.” “Jon66”

        “Jon66”, who told you an insufferable pretension of moral ascendancy, combined with a patently pedestrian intelligence, is the best and only way to advocate for Zionism?

    • a blah chick
      July 13, 2017, 9:57 am

      I have read Yehoshua and Oz, Hertzl too. I grew up hearing the Zionist narrative about a small group of people who AGAINST ALL ODDS manage to carve out a wonderful, peace-loving nation state while surrounded by a sea of unremitting and incomprehensible Arab hate.

      Then in the late seventies, while attending college, I decided to to educate myself on the I/P issue and decided that a good place to start was Israel and how they treated their religious and ethnic minorities. Suddenly I found out about things I had never known before, about collective punishment and discrimination, about military government and massacres. So much of what Palestinians in Israel had to endure reminded me of the segregationist South my parents lived under.

      In short I have educated myself on Zionism and found it wanting. And I have found that most anti-Zionist are far more knowledgable about the subject than most Zionists. When will Zionists ask themselves about the terrible price they forced the Palestinians to pay for their nationalistic ambitions.

    • rhkroell
      July 13, 2017, 10:07 am

      Yonah admits to not knowing the 2000 year history of the Jewish people — only “some headlines” — yet she scolds any readers of Mondoweiss who have not read one book by Oz, Yehoshua and Grossman. “How can you have a war of ideas if you have not read them?”

      Yonah is confused, as usual, because she has been traumatized by the horrors of the Shoah, browbeaten by the endless profiteering of the holocaust industry (an ideological weapon which portrays Israel as the “eternal victim” of antisemitism), and the popular misrepresentation of the history of the Jews — and of the history of Zionism — by the MSM in Israel, the U.S. and elsewhere.

      A better place to begin forming and educated opinion on the Palestinian-Israeli conflict than reading Oz, Yehoshua and Grossman would be to read Heinrich Graetz’s HISTORY OF THE JEWS FROM THE OLDEST TIMES TO THE PRESENT (published in the 1850s) because he argues that Isak Markus Jost’s HISTORY OF THE ISRAELITES FROM THE TIME OF THE MACCABEES TO THE PRESENT (first published in 1820) misrepresents the Jewish people as a religious civilization rather than an eternal people, tribe, or Volksstamm with a common lineage and inherited traditions reaching back to a mythic past.

      Graetz’s HISTORY was the first Jewish nationalist argument, of which I am aware, that characterizes Jews as a chosen moral people with a specific historical beginning and a legitimate historical teleology (as documented in the Torah). It was written at a time when different ethnic groups (especially in Central Europe) were staking claims to particular pieces of real estate, so it’s not surprising that some Jews would begin to formulate that ideological argument at that particular time (given that historical context).

      But identifying the crux of the Jewish nationalist argument is really only a necessary beginning, unfortunately, to becoming an informed student on this particular topic.

    • Keith
      July 13, 2017, 10:33 am

      YONAH FREDMAN- “…I know the incredible abyss created by the Shoah and the need to respond to that abyss. Zionism is one response.”

      The “abyss” created by the Shoa in 2017 is, to a significant degree, a Zionist created abyss intended to motivate Jews to support Zionism. That is why, prior to Zionism becoming as powerful as it is today, from 1950 through 1959 there were only 4 American made Holocaust films. From 2000 through 2009 there were 15. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Holocaust_films

      • RoHa
        July 14, 2017, 7:53 pm

        In the 1950s, films connected with WW2 were aimed at an audience who had first hand experience of that war.

    • Misterioso
      July 13, 2017, 11:26 am

      @yonah fredman

      Zionism is racism. Zionism is theft. Zionism is fascism. Zionism is doomed.

      Bottom line: Foreign Jews had the same right to Palestine as Irish Catholics and Mexican atheists, i.e., none whatsoever!! Therein lies the root of the conflict.

    • Mooser
      July 13, 2017, 4:38 pm

      “devoted to ignoring other views of jewish history other than the assimilationist view.”

      “Yonah”, how does a Jew go about being “other than assimilationist” in America? Can he just grow peyas and pray in Hebrew, or must he renounce his citizenship?

      Your entire “assimilationist” schtik is nonsense.

    • Talkback
      July 13, 2017, 5:55 pm

      Yonah: “How can you have a war of ideas if you have not read them?”

      Oh, that’s easy. We follow universal values.

      Yonah: “It is so safe and warm (for you antizionists) in the cocoon of mondoweiss.”

      Yes, safe and warm is the opposite to a territory occupied by Zionist terrorists.

    • Mooser
      July 13, 2017, 9:12 pm

      “It is so safe and warm (for you antizionists) in the cocoon of mondoweiss.”

      I think you are confusing pursuit of the ideal with the world we inhabit. The perspective of society at large towards smaller groups/ separate societies that have coexisted in proximity but with distance, is a phenomenon with historical precedent plus historical cause and effect. It is good to posit a society with full participation. (Of course those who long for the disappearance of small cultures and small languages are in a separate category of rooting against all non utilitarian cultures, and I find their attitude suspicious and amoral, but that’s a separate category. I am referring to the apathetic rather than the antipathetic.)

      Somehow “yonah”, I’ve never thought of you as “antipathetic”.

    • DaBakr
      July 14, 2017, 5:55 pm

      @yf
      The last paragraph is refreshing coming from a commenter who had always seemed to have a very accommodating view of blatent intolerance.

      I understand that Zionist viewpoints are as diverse as Muslim viewpoints but sometimes the commenters like the funny man and otters need to be reminded that they like to play I their own sandbox and have a very low tolerance for any but the few zionists that post here and that give them rocket fuel for their own rhetoric

      • Mooser
        July 14, 2017, 6:26 pm

        “The last paragraph is refreshing coming from a commenter who had always seemed to have a very accommodating view of blatent intolerance.”

        I would think so. “Yonah Fredman” wrote it. Check the link. It’s from his archive.

      • echinococcus
        July 15, 2017, 8:45 am

        Abubakr,

        I understand that Zionist viewpoints are as diverse as Muslim viewpoints but

        As usual, just when some people say they understand is when they have not the foggiest idea. Zionism is by definition a political belief. It consists of establishing a “Jewish” racist sovereignty over other people’s land, period.

        There is no diversity at all, only monolithic belief in the doctrine. No matter all the pretense.

        Just as with the Islamic religion: it’s not inborn, and one has to rigidly profess the same monolithic belief to belong to it, viz that there are no gods but the God and Mohammed is their prophet. An explicit requirement. Again, no diversity at all.

      • gamal
        July 15, 2017, 11:32 am

        “Zionism is by definition a political belief” just as with the Islamic religion?

        “Just as with the Islamic religion:”

        “it’s not inborn, and one has to rigidly profess the same monolithic belief to belong to it”,

        are you making the rules now or just surmising?

        “belong to it” yes I joined as soon as I was able, only just scrapped in.

        “viz that there are no gods but the God and Mohammed is their prophet. An explicit requirement. Again, no diversity at all.”

        why yes the Islamic monolith overshadows us all, we scoff at those who would sow dissent in our ranks, never happen our “rigid profession” woudn’t allow it, stands to reason doesn’t it?

      • echinococcus
        July 15, 2017, 1:00 pm

        Gamal,

        No need to get lost in discussion here. In both cases, what the definition of “Zionist” or “Muslim” consists of is a very simple statement that admits no subtraction.

      • gamal
        July 15, 2017, 4:29 pm

        “that admits no subtraction”

        or even division, but there will be multiplication, thats the threat, and there will be no integration only differentiation, , and when the tangent is zero what then, i have discovered that where the limit approaches infinity fx( dt/rt+0)-0 = Black Russian, thank you I will, don’t drown it.

      • echinococcus
        July 15, 2017, 8:18 pm

        Thank you Gamal, I love the way you have with words. Hadn’t looked at it with that slant.
        At any rate, you made me remember the only time in my life I did pronounce the laa ilah ila etc., shibboleth-like, to save my ass from throat-cutting (with apologies to anatomy), very many years ago.

  3. a blah chick
    July 13, 2017, 10:05 am

    Next to Grossman Regev is like a breath of fresh air; say what you will but she is not the least bit apologetic about her racism and in fact revels in it. Grossman is like every other mealy-mouth liberal Zionist in that he talks up “freedom” and “democracy” and “equality” but only when he perceives that these things will not threaten his privilege as a white man in the Jewish state.

    The alternative is to admit that Zionism is a failed idea that needs to go.

    • Marnie
      July 13, 2017, 12:35 pm

      Well, it’s been a while abc – glad you’re back!

    • rhkroell
      July 13, 2017, 6:47 pm

      In his book, THE INVENTION OF THE JEWISH PEOPLE, Shlomo Sand sketches the trajectory of race theory in Europe in the second half of the 19th century. The belief that Jews and gentiles are distinct racial types was “the norm” in the scholarly community, he reports. “The murals in the tombs of the pharaohs depicted . . . human types whose physiognomy was identical with modern Jews. The Jewish race . . . has retained its integrity . . . and the Jewish type has conserved its purity throughout the centuries.”

      The Jewish race has “retained its integrity” because it was believed that the Jews possess “the holy seed” (THE INVENTION, Sand, Shlomo, New York, Verso, 2009, p. 77). Intermarriage cannot eliminate or dilute “the holy seed.” “The Jewish type is indestructible.” “Assimilation is impossible . . .” (79).

  4. Henry Norr
    July 14, 2017, 2:57 am

    >>When are liberal Zionists going to tell the settler movement to f— itself?

    As if the settler movement were the whole problem! It’s the whole Israeli mainstream – the Israeli consensus, so to speak – that denies justice to the Palestinians.

    • echinococcus
      July 15, 2017, 8:27 pm

      In fact, that question, “When are liberal Zionists going to tell the settler movement to f— itself?” pretends to ignore the respective roles. Liberal Zionists tie the Palestinians’ hands in endless unnecessary haggling while non-liberal Zionists and Americans cut them.

      I wrote “pretend’ because no one can believe any longer that it’s a product of ignorance or even stupidity.

Leave a Reply