-
-
- Resume builders: Be a broken record on Iran, cheer authoritarians … 1
- UN Committee: Israeli system ‘tantamount to apartheid’ 0
- Slater on Beinart 0
- And we live on… 0
- US official — we went to Israel first 3
- Israel lobby’s favorite senator tries to erase Palestinian refugee status … 23
- Israel takes 30 dunams of land near Salfit ‘for security … 4
- Aaron David Miller: After a short ‘peace process,’ look … 38
-
- BDS victory: South Africa strips Ahava’s ‘made in Israel’ label 713
- Video: Israeli mob demands all African refugees be deported from … 475
- Day after pogroms, Likud MK calls for internment camp for … 427
- Neverending Nakba: Israel breaks lull, attacks Gazan farmers 413
- ‘This is not fair play’: Mahmoud Sarsak’s family demands his … 389
- March of the Flags 345
- Neocons in Washington Post: Military strike on Iran would ‘calm … 323
- Nabi Saleh’s Bassem Tamimi convicted by Israeli courts based on … 293
-
- The Messiah’s Donkey: Settlers fire on Palestinian villagers as the … 235
- Aharon Appelfeld’s rage at the German language (and Arendt’s need … 156
- US to differentiate between ‘personally displaced’ Palestinian refugees and their … 129
- March of the Flags 127
- Affirming a Judaism and Jewish identity without Zionism 110
- Feeling the hate in Long Island 97
- Israeli judge to issue verdict in Rachel Corrie case 94
- WaPo’s Walter Pincus says US is ‘going above and beyond … 87
-
Recent Comments
click link to see last 100 comments- Resume builders: Be a broken record on Iran, cheer authoritarians in Gulf (1)
- Annie Robbins: Having recognized its weakness, the US knows that it will be the UN that takes the lead in Syria and...
- Did Israeli Eurovision contestant watch too much Juliano Mer Khamis? (54)
- Annie Robbins: GL, urban dictionary has PEP, just no explanation of progressive except for palestine....
- German Lefty: Annie, it looks like you got infected with the Eurovision virus. Great. The more fans, the better. The...
- US official — we went to Israel first (3)
- traintosiberia: OMG! Why I don”t have that Stockholm Syndrome yet! How long do I have to feign that I have it.
- Annie Robbins: a U.S. official…asked to remain anonymous owing to the sensitive nature of the issue. sensitive?...
- Carllarc: proof of ‘Israel firsters’, for sure
- Israel lobby’s favorite senator tries to erase Palestinian refugee status for millions (23)
- piotr: How many Jews who made aliya were actual refugees from Roman persecution? Thus the “Jew who taunted...
- Affirming a Judaism and Jewish identity without Zionism (113)
- yourstruly: what was that sound? the special relationship breaking down and the loud and sustained chorus that...
- MHughes976: I’m still a bit uncertain about what R.Brian means by ‘Zionism’: what proposition did...
- yourstruly: given, that the israel’s brutal occupation of palestine is why much of the arab/islamic world hates...
- Resume builders: Be a broken record on Iran, cheer authoritarians in Gulf (1)
Our Writers
- Philip Weiss
- Adam Horowitz
- Kate
- Today in Palestine
- Annie Robbins
- Pamela Olson
- Eleanor Kilroy
- Alex Kane
Blogroll
The War of Ideas in the Middle East
Oops! Inadvertent duplication. Sorry. So little time, so many excuses!
SEAFOID- My comment is referring to the economic consequences of an attack frequently referred to as a reason that the elites will show prudent restraint, not to the carnage and other consequences. As to the likely suffering of the Iranian people, etc, I seriously doubt that very many of our sociopathic elites will lose any sleep over it. To them, this is like a game. A grand chessboard.
“For Miller, the conflict with the present Iranian government defies solution since it is more about hegemony than nuclear weapons.”
This is a correct assessment. An Iranian nuclear capability (not even actual weapons) would place constraints on imperial action and Israeli ambitions. It’s all about power and hegemony. The Godfather doesn’t tolerate defiance. Mossadegh begat the Shah. The Iranian revolution begat ongoing hostility. Iran is a critically important geostrategic pivot. The goal is regime change. The stakes are high.
It would be a mistake to discount the prospects for an attack on Iran because of the effects on the world economy. The people calling the shots don’t think like you or me. There is opportunity in disaster. Who would suffer the most? Europe and China. Goodbye competition! Then the banksters would buy up real assets on pennies to the dollar. The fat-cats would own the planet lock, stock and barrel. We are headed in that direction now, a collapse would serve to speed up the process. We are ruled by sociopaths. Take care.
“Capitalism is the astounding belief that the most wickedest of men will do the most wickedest of things for the greater good of everyone.” (John Maynard Keynes)
“For Miller, the conflict with the present Iranian government defies solution since it is more about hegemony than nuclear weapons.”
This is a correct assessment. An Iranian nuclear capability (not even actual weapons) would place restraints on imperial actions and on Israeli ambitions. It’s all about power and hegemony. The Godfather doesn’t tolerate defiance. Mossadegh begat the Shah. The Iranian revolution begat ongoing hostility. Iran is a critically important geostrategic pivot. The goal is regime change. The stakes are high.
I don’t know why folks tend to place undue emphasis on the public statements of known liars.
“Every government is run by liars and nothing they say should be believed.” (I.F. Stone)
“...officialdom doesn’t make statements to represent reality. It constructs stories to legitimize the pursuit of interests.” (William Blum)
“In politics, no matter what ideology is proclaimed, what people do is infinitely more significant than what they say.” (Gabriel Kolko)
“It’s useless to react to the news of the day; instead we should understand each report as a maneuver in a hostile field of strategies to be decoded, operations designed to provoke a specific reaction.” (The Invisible Committee, The Coming Insurrection, Quoted by Stephen Harper, Dissident Voice, 7/15/11)
“For all the talk about shared values between Israel and the United States, democracy is sadly not one of them right now….”
I disagree. Both of these elite run neoliberal warfare states share a profound contempt for democracy in any meaningful sense of the term.
IRA- According to your link, the current estimate of probability of a US and/or Israeli air strike against Iran by year’s end is about 34%. My personal estimate is 50%, allowing for the possibility that the US can achieve its minimal objectives through economic strangulation and covert operations. Iran is critical to the empire. Both Russia and China are trying desperately to wiggle free from the imperial tentacles. This involves secure energy resources. There are plans in the works involving pipelines, etc. An independent Iran is critical to these plans. Should Iran be reabsorbed into the empire, Russia and China would remain vulnerable to imperial pressures. The imperial elites calling the shots are myopic power-seeking risk takers. According to strategic analyst Michael T. Klare, we have entered an era of resource wars. These are dangerous times.
Separating Gaza from the West Bank and fobbing it off on Egypt appears to be an Israeli objective. Since Gaza has little to offer aside from ideological symbolism, getting rid of Gaza and its people would be extremely convenient de facto ethnic cleansing. Egypt has resisted this until now because Mubarak feared the influence of a united Hamas and Muslim Brotherhood. With Mubarak gone, this may be a possibility, however, all of the surrounding Arab countries have resisted an influx of Palestinians due to the political ramifications. Also, I suspect that the US may be reluctant to risk radicalizing Egypt.
PHIL- “…and his company, god bless it, played a significant role in the liberation of Egypt.”
Egypt has been liberated? Why wasn’t I informed? All this time I thought that the generals were still running things for their US paymasters. Also, Egypt is in an extremely weak position to seek real independence in the financially controlled, globally integrated economy. Cut off the funding and the people will starve. Financial coercion is an extremely effective means of control.
LYSIAS- “Is Facebook just a Trojan horse to allow government and corporations to access all sorts of data about people?”
I’m guessing it is. Also, both Zuckerberg and Bill Gates went to Harvard which, as far as I know, is not an IT powerhouse. But it is a CIA recruitment powerhouse. I think that the men in the shadows are more involved in the American economy than we realize.
Based upon this post, it would appear that Philip Roth, speaking through his characters, wildly overestimates the impact of public opinion on elite determined government policy. The reality is that most government policy now deviates significantly from popular opinion. Makes no difference. Neo-liberalism, neo-feudalism and austerity remain the goals, Israel but a part of the big picture.
PHIL- “Diversity and appreciation of minorities are two trends that are bound to undermine America's special relationship with Israel….”
America’s special relationship with Israel is determined by imperial geo-strategic considerations and Zionist power and aspirations. The percent of the minority population and reproductive rate has close to zero impact on policy. The most significant impact may well be to make it easier for the elites to view the citizenry as unwashed masses, now even more unfit to participate in meaningful political decision making. Neoliberalism is akin to class warfare, the “browning” of the population hardly a disincentive to continue disempowering and impoverishing the rest of us.
JOEC- Your point is very well taken and not generally appreciated. The same process is still occurring on a global scale as can be readily verified by the fate of all of those Third World people living in US satrapies which have been blessed/cursed with oil and other natural resources. Powerless people who stand in the way of imperial objectives are removed, one way or another. It is right and proper to criticize Israel, however, we must keep in mind that Israel’s behavior is staunchly supported by empire. One can argue the extent of Zionist influence on imperial policy, however, to suggest that empire’s actions would be benevolent or at least benign sans Zionist influence is crass imperial apologetics. So too, the myth that the US is a bastion of civil rights. The fate of the Palestinians is inexorably linked to imperial strategy as influenced by Zionist power.
As to the argument that the US engaged in ethnic cleansing, the answer seems to me simple and straight forward. Yes, our ancestors did and it was wrong, but there is little which can be done to correct the situation now. Empire is currently committing massive human rights violations and that is where our priorities should lie. Israel, an integral part of empire, is committing massive human rights violations which have been enabled by American Zionist support making Zionists directly responsible for crimes being committed now and in the future. The question is primarily a moral one. We oppose the crimes of empire and Israel because they are wrong, past injustices notwithstanding. Humanity must transition away from war and violent power-seeking if the species is to survive. It may already be too late.
FREBLOGS- “Israel has no more obligation to provide for the Palestinians than Micronesia does.”
This is equivalent to saying that the US has no more obligation to provide for the Indians that we forced into miserable reservations having slaughtered most of them in the process of acquiring their land than Micronesia does. This is a profoundly immoral position and you should be ashamed of yourself.
For quite a few years now, I have voted for the Green Party candidate for President because I believe that if you want real change you should vote for it. The sad truth is that most folks have continued to illogically vote for candidates representing the corporate oligarchs that are stiffing us and destroying the planet. Then they piss and moan about the politicians that THEY VOTED FOR. Or they didn’t vote signaling acquiescence. I believe that a citizen has an obligation to oppose injustice and stand up for human rights, peace and environmental sustainability. Nothing will ever change unless and until there is a revolt at the polls, and if the progressive candidate has no chance of winning then at least I have made one small statement of opposition to neoliberal globalization and to the catastrophe which will ensue. Of course I plan on voting for Jill Stein. A small gesture, perhaps, but at least a minimal demonstration of concern and integrity.
DAN CROWTHER- You are a welcome voice of sanity on this. I don't know why so many folks put so much stock in what these liars say. When the statements conflict with the facts on the ground, go with the facts on the ground.
PHIL- “…an astonishing speech….” “Hogue's was the most majestic performance at J St after Mustafa Barghouti's appearance. Her ten-minute speech was beautifully written, and beautifully delivered.” “But the speech is tragic.” “…Hogue's emotionally-honest account….” “…I honor Hogue's feelings. She was brave to address them so honestly.”
So, who was filling your wine glass when you wrote this? I personally tend to agree with Dena Shunra and Dan Crowther in regards to this smarmy shill for Israel.
Neoliberalism is the inevitable consequence of financialization. With modern day debt servitude, the carrot has disappeared, only the stick remains. The inculcation of fundamentalist fanaticism in the military and police a harbinger of repression to come. Democracy a brief interlude as we come full circle to the divine right of capital and corporate neo-feudalism. The 99% in deep trouble, the future of the species in doubt as the struggle for power shapes our destiny. Do I seem pessimistic?
FREDBLOGS- “…but it doesn’t seem to be a coincidence that the only Jews written about on this site are bad ones, other than ones who are lauded for turning against Israel and their fellow Jews.”
With all due respect, I think that your strong bias has caused you to misconstrue this post and the purpose of Mondoweiss. It seems to me that the lesson of the post is that this particular group places organizational solidarity above human rights and elementary moral decency. This is not an exclusively Jewish problem, nor is the behavior of a group of ultra-Orthodox Jews typical of American Jews, however defined. The point is that when group loyalty trumps group morality, you are headed for trouble. Does this pertain to the Middle East? You betcha! It also pertains to empire and our responsibilities in that area as well.
RADII- “…there is not enough gay money to substitute for the lower amount of jewish money this election cycle”
I will be astonished if Wall Street abandons their White House lawyer. I predict that BO will be more than amply funded.
“Secondly, a real Israeli leftist recognizes the Palestinian right of return. (Rights, as we know, can be realized in various ways; and when there is a clash between rights, solutions have to be worked out. But before any realizations and solutions can come about, the rights must be recognized.)”
This is an excellent formulation of this essential principle.
DENIS- "...but think how flaccid it would be...."
Flaccid? Do you have any idea how that word terrifies me?
Perhaps they could do an update to Bridget loves Bernie. How about Barack loves Bibi?
WOODY TANAKA- I owe you an apology. My comment to you on 5/3 at 12:32 was unjustified and indefensible. Sorry.
WOODY TANAKA- “It would be even healthier for America if it actually wasn’t under the command of the state of Israel.”
So you think that Lloyd Blankfein and Jamie Dimon take their marching orders from Bibi? That neoliberal globalization, the financial screwing of Greece, Iceland and Ireland, and America’s current obsession with China all originate from Tel Aviv? My, what a fascinating geo-strategic analysis!
“Most importantly, former Israeli Prime Minister Ehud Olmert (who authorized the slaughter in Gaza) yesterday joined the chorus of prominent Israeli critics of the rush to war. He attacked Netanyahu in New York, and was booed by Americans for doing so.”
The objection which I have always had with Mondoweiss’ interpretation of events is the extent to which the “Israeli lobby” is said to implement some alleged Israeli consensus. I would suggest that American Zionist Jews tend to be more militaristic and uncompromising than Israeli Jews, and profoundly impact Israeli policies through their funding of Israeli politicians and settlements, and through their money and power in the US. So much so that when an Israeli politician such as Olmert deviates from the American Zionist script, he is booed. And don’t forget that Netanyahu graduated from an American high school and has two degrees from MIT, working for the Boston Consulting Group as well. Some of his political opponents have criticized him for a lack of Israeli national identity and loyalty. He is ideologically aligned with the American neocons and followed their neoliberal economic recommendations contained in “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm.” link to iasps.org
I continue to believe that the center of Zionist power is the US, not Israel, and that the dog and tale analogy is meaningless.
HOPHMI- “Why don’t you enlighten us, Kathleen, as to what power Jews had before 1948.”
My, what a shameless rhetorical gambit. Are you suggesting, Hophmi, that for the last two-thousands years Jews have been powerless? That you are unaware of instances of Jewish power and privilege? That the Jews had it worse than the peasantry? This is nothing but the ongoing Jews as eternal victims ideology of Zionism, disingenuously phrased to put the onus on Kathleen to “prove” that Jews had power historically. If you seriously believe that Jews have been historically powerless before miraculously blossoming in the US (and the USSR), please indicate this so that we will know that you are not challenging Kathleen on a point which you know to be true but see benefit in implying otherwise as a debating tactic.
It is primarily the entertainment media which create the social mythology which significantly influence reality perception. We live in a militarized warfare state which, to be successful, needs to normalize violence and brutality. The increasing violence in the media suggests that we are going to become an increasingly repressive society as a consequence of neoliberal globalization, with never ending, unpopular wars abroad and police state repression at home.
An additional factor is the cultivation of a Manichean mindset where “we” are depicted as the “good guys” who are fighting a never ending battle with the “evil other.” We strive to do good, our intentions pure and noble, and if we occasionally are forced to perform despicable deeds it is necessary for the greater good of all. Good deeds by the evil other a cynical ploy to advance evil objectives. For example, it is difficult to imagine Luke Skywalker or Harry Potter engaging in evil acts, whereas, Darth Vader and Lord Valdemort are the very essence of vile evilness. This created social mythology forms the popular mindset which can then be exploited by the news media. Instead of judging people based upon their actions, the media labels people and groups (the new Hitler, etc) and judges them based upon the label.
All of this is no accident. In a militaristic empire such as ours, there is a constant need to pre-condition the public mind to accept the righteousness and need for the inevitable wars of aggression and other despicable acts that the empire inevitably engages in. Further, the elites need to deceive themselves as well.
“perhaps if I really wanted to help, I wouldn't ever come to Haiti to begin with. I'd keep my fight at home in the United States, rallying people to try and build awareness that places like Haiti suffer because of policies benefitting our government, our corporations, and ultimately, ourselves.”
The author starts out fine, then goes berserk: “I often think we will have to evolve to the point that the idea of religion is cast aside, that the idea of nation is cast aside, that the way we define ourselves (white, black, Christian, Muslim, American, Haitian) have to be abandoned.”
That Haiti has suffered grievously due to European colonialism and American neo-colonialism is beyond dispute. His “solution,” however, invites ridicule. And it goes downhill when he discusses the EU and Rwanda. He seems confused. Why am I bothering to comment?
Perhaps to take the opportunity to point out the impact that European and American imperialism has had on the people of the Third World. Many of their problems are a consequence of Western intervention and exploitation, which continues today with the subjugation of their economies to the Washington consensus. Most of the nations which the West arrogantly refers to as “failed states” would be more properly called “victim states.” Furthermore, this whole process is unsustainable and unless a radical restructuring takes place soon, the future of humanity is in peril.
HOSTAGE- “Some of the best articles here at MW highlight the fact that Reformed Jews have abandoned the founding principles of their movement. Reform Judaism was a deliberate rejection of the primitive elements of “Classical Judaism”. Nowadays the stream has conscientiously adopted Zionism and their leaders, like Rabbi Ammiel Hirsch of the Stephen Wise Free Synagogue, are openly preaching against “the disease of assimilation”.
Fascinating post, Hostage, as always, but I’m afraid I must to a degree dissent. Reformed Rabbis have for a long time preached against “the disease of assimilation,” or at least of intermarriage, but to no avail. Surely to no avail for secular Jews, and the enlightenment gave the Reformed Jews permission to ignore their Rabbi’s entreaties. My personal experience has been that Reformed Jews frequently only go to Temple on high holidays and are not overly concerned with the socio-political views of the Rabbi. You wouldn’t be having this shift of liberal Jewish opinion on Israel if it was otherwise. If the majority of American Jews were returning to Classical Judaism or its nominally secular equivalent Zionism, then Phil is wasting his time. I feel reasonably certain that Phil does not feel that he is wasting his time. I agree. Furthermore, I would be astonished if secular and Reformed Jews willingly acquiesce to a return to Rabbinical control. To the contrary, as Norman Finkelstein discusses in his new book “Knowing Too Much” (I just got my copy and have started reading), American Jews are beginning to distance themselves from Israel because of Israel’s behavior which conflicts with their liberal values. Insofar as we live in an elite run society, the ramifications of all of this are not clear, particularly in view of the fact that we have entered a period of upheaval and uncertainty.
TOKYOBK- “Why should I not be proud of my country, The USA?”
Because it is a vicious, brutal empire that routinely engages in mass-murder and is the driving force behind neoliberal globalization?
DAVID SAMEL- “I am very well acquainted with hundreds of Jews, both in an out of my family, and have seen no evidence of such “hate and vile thoughts” among them.”
Two comments: First, what you say is absolutely true and has been my experience as well. In fact, I doubt that most American secular and Reformed Jews are even aware of much of this pre-enlightenment mysticism which informs Zionism, the nominally secular return to Classical Judaism. My second comment is that this lack of awareness is part of the problem insofar as it enables liberal American Jews to support Israel out of a felt sense of kinship with Israeli Jews even though they have little in common. What many American Jews don’t seem to comprehend is that they have much more in common with their liberal Gentile neighbors than they do with these religious fundamentalists. Further, the extent to which the Zionists have exploited the Holocaust to attempt to legitimize their retrograde ideology. Make no mistake, Zionism is a rejection of enlightenment thinking.
TOKYOBK- Ben, a thousand apologies! When I read Phil’s post, I thought that what with Eliezer being at Yale, and with mostly American Jews coming together to talk about their “Jewish experience,” that the discussions and your comments here primarily related to Jewish life in the US. When Phil writes that “Ben began the questions by asking me Did I ever have misgivings about my work given that it has been attractive to anti-Semites, and what did I aim to do about that,” I assumed that you were referring to anti-Semitism in the US. Now you say that “Anti semitism in the US is almost non existent….” Jeez, we are in complete agreement! So what is the problem? “There is some more antisemitism in Europe and more still in the ME.” Ah, the Arabs. You guys at Eliezer are concerned that Mondoweiss is inciting the Arabs! Phil a big celebrity on the Arab street!
You may have a point. If I were to guess, I would wager that anti-Semitism and anti-American sentiments probably are higher in the Middle East. Gee, I wonder why? Any ideas? Now if I were to hazard a non-scholarly guess, I would suggest that Israeli militarism and American imperialism might have something to do with it. Of course, that answer is hopelessly simplistic (and possibly anti-Semitic) for the scholars at Eliezer. The mystery is solved! Esau did it! Knock me over with a feather! Only a true Eliezer scholar could piece together the evidence to come up with that conclusion.
Let me conclude by noting that if you are truly concerned about anti-Semitism in the Middle East, you would support Phil and Adam in their efforts to overcome Israeli militarism and anti-Arabism, and make Israel a state of all of its citizens. Perhaps then you could spend less time obsessing about apes and pigs and Protocols.
TOKYOBK- Essentially, you have just admitted that anti-Semitism in the US is so low that it takes scholarly credentials to detect it. Of course, there is racism against other groups much more easily detected. I have heard people referred to as “jungle bunnies,” but these weren’t Jews, although I believe a Jewish comedian in New York, formerly on Seinfeld, referred to some Black hecklers in the audience in a racist fashion. Of late, I have seen the phrase “raghead” used. Perhaps Pam Geller can fill you in. Perhaps this is why some Jews feel that a Jewish education is so important. How are the little dears going to detect so much pervasive anti-Semitism without express tutelage? Or the power of the Protocols to overpower the social media in our bookish society? You know, Ben, I think you have found your calling. Socializing with up and coming members of the Jewish elite in your new house at Yale, drinking fine wine from a “silver Judaica” wine service, basking in the reflected glow of tales of shared victim-hood augmented with biblical certitude. No doubt about it, some victims have it better than others.
EDWIN- It was not my intent to “prove” that the Protocols were not a best seller, they probably are what with all of the free publicity and the notion that it is forbidden for Gentiles to read them. Heck, that is why I read them to see what all of the fuss was about. What I learned was that they are extraordinarily dull, high readership more an indication of curiosity than anti-Semitism. The fixation on the Protocols by Zionist Jews is indicative of their need for some evidence of anti-Semitism, however contrived, to justify their behavior. As for “people raving about sons of apes and pigs,” I have never heard of Jews referred to like this and can only wonder what infantile stories are taken as gospel by the “scholars” at Eliezer. I can only conclude that the endless and increasingly desperate search for anti-Semitism has a degenerative effect on mental functioning even as it promotes tribal camaraderie.
TOKYOBK- “If Israel went away there would still be people raving about sons of apes and pigs and the Protocols would still be a bestseller.”
Do you have any idea how bad this looks? You’re a PhD candidate and you mouth crap like this? Apparently, rationality is not your forte. As for the Protocols, several comments are in order. First, I have a copy and you know what? It is the dullest book I have ever read. Obviously bogus, not to be taken seriously, and atrociously written. Second, on a per capita basis, who has more frequently read the Protocols, Jews or Gentiles? The Protocols are somewhat akin to the “anti-Semitic” websites, some of which maintained by the Mossad as black propaganda, which are frequented by significant numbers of Jews getting their anti-Semitic fix so that they can justify their victim-hood ideology. Your privileged, deal with it.
MARC B- I think you have identified a critical aspect of this post, however, you may be misconstruing Phil’s intent. Or I may be misconstruing Phil’s intent. Briefly, Phil realizes that on this issue you can’t change hearts and minds with rational argument. He is telling stories, modern parables to try to sneak a little truth past intellectual defense mechanisms. His target audience is the Mondoweiss readership. He is trying promote discussion, not give a lecture. Either that or he is losing his grip on reality and I am projecting rationality on someone who is intellectually disheveled. Either way, it is quite clear that he likes good food and good wine, something we all can agree on.
PHIL- “A year ago I met a scholar named Ben Karp who asked if I would come for Sabbath dinner at a Jewish society at Yale called Eliezer.”
I have reread the post and found it fascinating on multiple levels. I originally was going to make an additional brief comment on the “scholar” who claimed recurring historical anti-Semitism, but have decided not to. Something about the post doesn’t ring true. Are you really as you present yourself, or have you constructed an artificial persona designed to elicit comments of a certain nature? This occurred a year ago? Why bring it up now, not then? Something happening here, what it is ain’t exactly clear.
PHIL- “A young scholar next to me who is studying proto-Zionism in Europe in the 1800s out of a commitment to Israel said how could I be so sure that anti-Semitism was not going to return in a virulent form. It had been recurring throughout our history. Every 50 or 100 years there were major episodes. Of course it could happen again.”
Phil, with all due respect, you need to get infinitely more familiar with actual Jewish history so you can more effectively deal with Jewish mythology. There was a lot of violence in Europe for many centuries as countries, cities and groups struggled for power. In fact, the creation of the nation states was not by mutual consent of the citizenry, it was by force and violence. A lot of people were killed, mostly Gentiles. What else was going on during these “major episodes” of anti-Semitism? Most Zionists have a laser-like focus on Jewish “suffering,” along with a total disdain for non-Jewish suffering. They are not interested in actual history and how the Jews fit in, rather they defend a myopic mythology which reinforces their ideology of eternal victimhood. Perceived anti-Semitism is at the very core of their Holocaust centered religion. They aren’t rational, rather, they are very logically promoting Jewish solidarity and defending their privileged status. I might add that much of Jewish history written by Jews for Jews is going to be Jewish mythology with footnotes, the type of crap an Alan Dershowitz would write. Some of the Mondoweiss commenters appear very knowledgeable and could make suggestions. Israel Shahak could be a starting point.
KRAUSS- “Israel is perhaps our return to the shtetl.”
Indeed it is! But not a physical shtetl, rather a shtetl of the mind. An ideology which permits the Jews to be fully integrated in Gentile society yet avoid assimilation. Both Israel Shahak and Joel Kovel see Zionism as a return to Classical Judaism, albeit in a secularized form. Unobtrusive tribalism. Invisible nepotism. Quite a successful group strategy, at least for the Zionist elites.
1200 Rabbis suggests to me that there is a definite link between Zionism and Judaism, anti-Zionist protestations notwithstanding.
HOPHMI- “Israel Shahak is not a scholar of Jewish history, and he’s not thought of as an objective or mainstream voice in the field. I’ll leave it at that.”
You’re correct, Shahak is no Bernard Lewis. That is what makes this radical dissident scholar so valuable. If you pursue main stream Jewish historians, you will get primarily conventional mythology camouflaged with footnotes. That is the problem. How many Mondoweiss commenters continue to maintain that the Jews have endured 2000 years of irrational persecution at the hands of the Gentiles, with no context provided? If Genghis Khan had massacred a village containing 100 Jews and 1000 Gentiles, would Jewish history record that as a pogrom resulting in the death of 100 Jews? How about your reference to Jews massacred during the Crusades? Is that how Jewish history regards the Crusades? The massacre of Jews, nothing more? Or World War II, the killing of 6 million Jews while the world stood by, nothing more? This is ahistorical myopia designed to reinforced Jewish tribal solidarity based upon tales of eternal anti-Semitism.
“It is true that Jews technically often lived under the protection of the crown, enabling many Jews to be free of the feudal system that often crushed Christian peasants.”
They weren’t “free” of the feudal system, they were an integral part of the feudal system that often crushed Christian peasants. Which, I might add, contributed significantly to feelings of anti-Semitism among the peasants. Furthermore, “…classical Judaism flourishes best under strong regimes which are dissociated from most classes in society, and in such regimes fulfill one of the functions of the middle class – but in a permanently dependent form. For this reason they are opposed not only by the peasantry…. But more importantly by the non-Jewish middle class….” (Israel Shahak) In other words, many “pogroms” were, in fact, peasant revolts which were brutally suppressed with considerable bloodshed, none of which seems to enter the Jewish mythology of eternal and irrational persecution.
“That said, it is simply incorrect to posit that it was the choice of most Jews to live apart.”
Most Jews? The elites decide, the rest go along, or else, particularly during that period of history. Jeez, I hope that you are not suggesting that during most of classical Judaism that the Jewish elites wanted nothing more than for Jews to assimilate? How about now? Israel was created by the Zionists as an experiment in brotherly love? The tribe expanding to include all of humanity?
Hophmi, you have tried to have your cake and eat it too. Most of your comments to me have been a regurgitation of Jewish suffering and anti-Semitism, as if Jewish privilege didn’t exist and normal (for that historical period) conflicts didn’t arise, with a few qualifiers thrown in to make it sound balanced. The “freer Jews are, the more they interact with those around them.”? Why don’t you run that by the Palestinians? The trouble with your historicity is that it doesn’t jibe with the facts on the ground.
HOPHMI- “It was not the choice of Jews to live apart. It was the edict of Christian communities in Europe who excluded Jews from their societies.”
According to Israel Shahak, “The legal status of a Jewish community in the period of classical Judaism was normally based upon a ‘privilege’ - a charter granted by a king or prince (or, in Poland after the 16th century, by a powerful nobleman) to the Jewish community and conferring on it the rights of autonomy - that is, investing the rabbis with the power to dictate to the other Jews. An important part of such privileges, going as far back as the late Roman Empire, is the creation of a Jewish clerical estate which, exactly like the Christian clergy in medieval times, is exempt from paying taxes to the sovereign and is allowed to impose taxes on the people under its control - the Jews - for its own benefit.”
Methinks that your characterization of historical Jewish exclusivism as simply a product of Christian discrimination is a triumph of ideology over historicity. The situation varied from time to time and country to country with various interrelated factors coming into play, however, to simply describe all or most of Jewish history as a response to Gentile anti-Semitism is to regurgitate Zionist mythology. The reality is that during the classical period the Rabbis and other Jewish elites desired the Jews to be a people apart. Nowadays, Zionism unites the Jews in tribal solidarity with the strong support of most of organized Jewry and much of the Rabbinate.
HOPHMI- “Jews require kosher food.”
Putting aside the obvious qualifier that only those Jews who keep Kosher “require kosher food,” it seems to me that one of the primary purposes of Jewish dietary laws is to make breaking bread with Gentiles both difficult and unlikely. Also, as you point out, it provides a basis for Jews to restrict their activities to those involving other Jews to maintain being Kosher. When the Rabbis concocted these laws that was their intent. Segregationist? You betcha!
PHIL- Fascinating post. A lot of food for thought.
Let us begin by noting that in the roughly eight centuries of Classical Judaism, the Jews were a people apart in the fullest sense of the term. They lived segregated from their surrounding Gentile communities, wore distinctive clothing, were easily recognizable and, except for the elites, avoided social interaction with Gentiles. About two-hundred years ago, during the enlightenment, some Gentile Kings greatly restricted the coercive power of the Rabbis over their respective Jewish community, and applied pressure for Jewish assimilation into Gentile society. Many Jews welcomed this, and there was a splintering of the Jews into Orthodox Jews, Conservative Jews, Reformed Jews and Secular Jews. So, beginning about two-hundred years ago, the Jews began to assimilate in the Western Europe, the process slowly moving eastward. Zionism was a response to both anti-Semitism and, more significantly, assimilation which posed an existential “danger” to Jewish tribalism.
Nowadays, Jews are fully integrated into American and European society. Nonetheless, Zionism, in conjunction with organized Jewry, exploiting the Holocaust to the fullest, have constructed significant barriers to Jewish assimilation. While fully integrated and highly prosperous, many Jews are ideologically united in tribal solidarity as a consequence of Zionist support for the Jewish state of Israel. In other words, Zionism permits the Jews to be both integrated into the surrounding community while remaining ideologically and psychologically a people apart. This whole process is greatly facilitated by Jews isolating themselves from non-Jews by limiting themselves to Jewish clubs, Jewish associations, Jewish schools, Jewish camps and trips, etc. When not in contact with “the other,” it is possible to conjure up all manner of ideologically induced bias. One of the best ways to counteract prejudice is through contact with your fellow human beings so that you come to recognize their essential humanity. So yes, Shaul Magid is quite correct to recognize the value of diversity, albeit after the fact. Beinart’s emphasis on Jewish schools indicates to me that he is a supporter of Jewish tribalism, Israel and Zionism a means to that end. And while intermarriage may be the bane of Zionists and Rabbis alike, it is hardly a necessary precondition to Jews viewing Gentiles as their fellow humans rather than as their eternal persecutors.
Phil said: “This raises the issue of why American Jews simply don't throw in the towel on the Jewish state and say, Let's have what we like over here: democracy!!”
That is a key question, isn’t it? Why do an overwhelming number of the American Jewish elite support Zionism and Israel? Without this support, Israel could not behave the way it does, but why the support? I believe it indicates that most American Jewish elites want Jews to be an integrated people apart. They want to maintain Jewish tribalism because they perceive that it somehow benefits them. A well organized and highly motivated group which facilitates Jewish elite power-seeking. The iron law of oligarchy is that a disorganized majority is always controlled by an organized minority.
The Holocaust needs to viewed in its historical context. Any honest evaluation of history will quickly conclude that mass-murder is the rule, not the exception. This is an inevitable consequence of the struggle for power which threatens to end the human experiment. The greatest threat to society is posed by our power hungry elites. Unless we can deal with this, I fear that the future is truly bleak.
AARONAARONS- I’m glad you brought this up. I don’t know about Al Qaeda per say, but the Mujahadeen were a creation of the CIA used to destabilize countries targeted for regime change. Syria is targeted for regime change. US/NATO/Israel’s fingerprints are all over this imperial destabilization attempt. The empire seeks Middle East hegemony and stability, however, most folks don’t understand that “stability” refers to the power relationships, not to peace and tranquility, the bane of empire. Divide and conquer, divide and rule. The empire loves chaos, the opposition divided and fighting among themselves, no real organized opposition to speak of. The issues decided by military power where Uncle Sam reigns supreme. I am unaware of any instance of the empire acting out of humanitarian concern, humanitarian intervention a shopworn pretext for mass-murder followed by imperial control.
PHIL- “im with the syrian rebels.”
Yes indeed, Phil, you are a true blue liberal to the core! Never met a “humanitarian” intervention you didn’t like. It allows you to join the parade and root for empire without feeling guilty. And, my, didn’t things work out well in Libya! Tens of thousands killed, the infrastructure destroyed., their relatively high standard of living in the toilet, armed rebel factions roaming the streets out of control, ongoing ethnic strife, the country on the verge of splitting up. And now you want to duplicate this in Syria? God save the world from liberal good intentions!
LIBRA- “Keith, I really doubt that Herzl’s vision was of a modern Israel reverting to a Biblical mindset.”
In the two quotes, both Herzl and Ben-Gurion saw Israel as an appendage of imperial power supporting empire’s designs in Arabia. Currently, Israel has independent goals in the region that seem at least somewhat congruent with imperial geo-strategy. I have seen no indication that Israel has any intention of integrating itself into the Middle East at peace with its neighbors, with any crosspollination of cultures. In other words, Israel was and remains an unnatural alien presence maintained by imperial support.
“It seems to me Israel has indeed become a Middle East culture….”
Jeez, I don’t see this at all. During the Nakba, the Zionists intentionally destroyed hundreds of Palestinian villages, tore up olive trees and planted evergreens reminiscent of Europe, not the Middle East. The intent was to destroy any reminders of the Palestinians and their culture. The original Zionists mostly constructed Tel Aviv rather than live in the “sacred” Jerusalem. Currently, Israel is a land of modern European architecture rather than traditional, or influenced by tradition, and heavily polluted to boot. Not surprising considering that most Israelis look down on the Arabs and their culture, and identify with Western culture and “progress.”
Referring to a historic building, Ilan Pappe writes: “Today the house is no longer there, a victim of development, which has razed this architectural relic to the ground to make room for a car park next to the new Sheraton Hotel. Thus, in this street, too, no trace is left of the ‘White City’, which has slowly transmogrified into the sprawling, polluted, extravagant metropolis that is modern Tel Aviv.”
“[Iran's leaders] all come basically ideologically, religiously with the statement that Israel is an unnatural creature, it will not survive.”
There seems to me to be a basic truth to the statement. Israel misrepresents itself and in many ways is not what it appears to be. At the most basic level, these are not Jews “returning home.” Not just the lineage, mind you, but the cultural orientation. The Jewish Israelis do not appear to respect the Middle Eastern culture (supposedly of their ancestors), rather they identify with the European Ashkenazi culture of their founders. It is an unnatural creature that exists as a consequence of imperial support upon which it depends to maintain the status quo, even so far as being integrated into the US European Command, not the Central Command responsible for the rest of the Middle East. This is exactly what the founders had in mind as the following quotes indicate.
"Supposing his Majesty the Sultan were to give us Palestine ..We should there form an outpost of civilization as opposed to barbarism." (Theodor Herzl, 1896) (Quoted in "The Hidden History of Zionism" by Ralph Schoenman)
“Ben-Gurion had always seen the Jewish state as part of the West, not as part of the region: a Middle East without Western colonialism would be too dangerous for Israel; Israel could and should be turned into an American strategic asset in the region.” (“Imperial Israel and the Palestinians,” Nur Masalha)
PHIL- “The Jewish problem of our times is psychological denial having to do with our relations to others….”
Yes, and this is a manifestation of a larger phenomenon which affects us all. By and large, people are rarely rational in regards to their core beliefs. Rather, they logically adhere to group mythology/ideology. This is what binds people together in communal solidarity. I’m not sure society could exist without some unifying mythology, and, if it could, what it would be like. But, you are quite correct to perceive that Zionist mythology cannot stand up to rational scrutiny, which is why diehard Zionists will continue to deny empirical reality, rational argument falling on deaf ears.
KRAUSS- “In the Jewish context, the powerlessness and chronic weakness is the backdrop. Jews don’t know power. We’ve never really tasted it.”
“…during the whole of the classical period the Jews, in spite of all the persecutions to which they were subjected, formed an integral part of the privileged classes.” (“Jewish History, Jewish Religion” Israel Shahak)
Krauss- “We cannot comprehend ourselves as oppressors of another people. It’s a new role for us.”
“Jews also took an active part in the Dutch colonial slave trade; indeed, the bylaws of the Recife and Mauricia congregations (1648) included an imposta (Jewish tax) of five soldos for each Negro slave a Brazilian Jew purchased from the West Indies Company. Slave auctions were postponed if they fell on a Jewish holiday. In Curacao in the seventeenth century, as well as in the British colonies of Barbados and Jamaica in the eighteenth century, Jewish merchants played a major role in the slave trade. In fact, in all the American colonies, whether French (Martinique), British, or Dutch, Jewish merchants frequently dominated. (Rabbi Marc Lee Raphael, quoted by Jim Haygood, 12/23/10, Mondoweiss)
link to mondoweiss.net
“We live entangled in webs of endless deceit, often self-deceit, but with a little honest effort, it is possible to extricate ourselves from them.” (Noam Chomsky)
MOOSER- “There does seem to be a persistent minority of commenter on Mondoweiss who insists that either their Zionist or anti-Zionist views are buttressed by assigning racial characteristics to Jews or the Jewish mind.”
I am not aware of any commenter who has assigned racial characteristics to Jews or the Jewish mind, however, I am aware of Judeo-Zionist ideology which assigns anti-Semitism as an intrinsic Gentile characteristic. I am also aware of Jewish Mondoweiss commenters who have apparently absorbed this ideological indoctrination and who assume that any Gentile questioning of this Judeo-Zionist ideology, Jewish success, Jewish power, etc, is a de facto anti-Semite, that is an intrinsic, irrational hater of Jews because they are Jews as evidenced by one (two? three?) crap-ass comments.
“Bugs me equally to read about the intrinsically humane or liberal traditions of Judaism as it does to read those who assign a universal malignity against others to Jews.”
It is quite apparent that this discussion bugs you. Perhaps you need to reflect upon why that is so? Both Judaism in its various manifestations and Zionism are ideologies which strongly influence the behavior of their followers. That Israel as a Jewish state would not exist without Zionism and the support of organized American Jewry makes a discussion of Judeo-Zionism and American Jewish power not only appropriate for Mondoweiss, but absolutely essential to understanding and resolving this issue. That you take such a discussion personal indicates that perhaps you have been influenced Judeo-Zionist ideology and that your Jewish-ness is more important to you than you let on. Perhaps you doth protest too much. I like you, Mooser, you can be hysterically funny, however, on this issue you have an extremely thin skin. And with your sharp tongue you can intimidate commenters merely trying to contribute to the discussion and doing the best they can with what they have to work with. Please try to give folks the benefit of the doubt. I leave you with a quote:
"Therefore, the real test facing both Israeli and diaspora Jews is the test of their self-criticism which must include the critique of the Jewish past. The most important part of such a critique must be detailed and honest confrontation of the Jewish attitude to non-Jews… Although the struggle against antisemitism (and of all other forms of racism) should never cease, the struggle against Jewish chauvinism and exclusivism , which must include a critique of classical Judaism, is now of equal or greater importance." (Israel Shahak)
“And don’t call them anti-Semites unless they have a history of animus toward the Jewish people.”
This is excellent advice for all of those Mondoweiss commenters who throughout much of their lives have been indoctrinated with the Holocaust religion and tales of eternal anti-Semitism. The cult of eternal victim-hood comes at a price. Time to move on.
“The problem is that we have a Jewish organizational world whose business model is anti-Semitism, and there’s not enough of it in the United States.”
Perceived anti-Semitism is the mother’s milk of Zionism and perceptions are malleable. Why else the extreme emphasis on Jewish suffering among people who have it relatively good? And what gives relatively well-off Jews the right to claim victim-hood status based upon the long ago suffering of others who happened to be Jewish? Why such a Judeo-centric focus? Manufactured anti-Semitism is an integral component of Zionism and of American Jewish support for Israel.
“Nobody ever loses their job for getting up on the wrong side of the bed one morning, reading an op-ed they don’t like, and then saying that that person is an anti-Semite.”
It seems to me that some Mondoweiss commenters have been a bit too casual with labeling someone or some comment as anti-Semitic. Personally, I haven’t encountered any obvious anti-Semitism on Mondoweiss, and I can’t conceive of Phil or Adam allowing that to occur.
The interview is typical of what is to be expected from the main stream media, which is an integral part of the doctrinal system. The elites need to communicate with the masses and this is how. Media which provide service to the system and the elites prosper. Those that don’t, don’t. Talk of media reform is a waste of time. The successful main stream media will always represent the views and goals of the elites of which they are a part. Mike Wallace was a member of the elite and shared many of their biases. The notion of truly objective journalism is a myth which serves the media well. People simply need to be aware of this and get most of their information from alternative media sources.
PHIL- “I keep saying that I want to change American Jewish identity because we won't change American policy without changing the Jews; Jews are just too powerful in American establishment.”
Don’t forget to mention how powerful American Zionist Jews are in shaping Israel’s society and policies, from funding settlements and birthright tours to political contributions to right-wing parties and politicians. Netanyahu was cheered at the AIPAC meeting because he said what they wanted to hear. Had he talked peace and accommodation, I suspect that he would have been booed. I hope Mondoweiss looks into this important aspect of the situation. I’ll end with a quote:
"For Israel's new American Jewish 'supporter,' however, such talk bordered on heresy: an independent Israel at peace with its neighbors was worthless; an Israel aligned with currents in the Arab world seeking independence from the United States was a disaster. Only an Israeli Sparta beholden to American power would do, because only then could US Jewish leaders act as spokesmen for American imperial ambitions." (Norman Finkelstein)
“…the more American Jews will be forced to choose between a Jewish state that is not fully democratic and a binational state that loses its Jewish character.”
I would be most interested to hear Beinart discuss the nature of the “Jewish character” that is in danger of being lost.
“Saving Israel as a democratic Jewish state and preserving the Zionist consensus in American Jewish life are two sides of the same struggle.”
Preserving the “the Zionist consensus in American Jewish life” seems a fertile area for additional discussion. Since Zionism was originally conceived as a way to establish a Jewish state, and since that has been done, should not Zionism be done with? Or has Zionism morphed into an ongoing ideological tool unifying Zionist Jews worldwide, as well as a never ending umbilical cord by which Israel draws sustenance from the Diaspora?
TOVIOS- “People on the left are much more independent thinkers less will to accept ideas uncritically.”
Surely you jest.
FREDBLOGS- “No, I wouldn’t believe such a quote without an original source….”
Well, we all understand that it is easy to believe what is convenient to believe, and to disbelieve that which is not. No doubt all of your assertions reference archival material? There are numerous quotes from numerous sources concerning the early Zionists statements of intent which they then implemented. Zionism was NOT a rescue mission. Who profited more from the Holocaust than the Zionists? If you want to chase after sources, enter the quote into google and have fun. As I mentioned, this has been fully discussed here on Mondoweiss. The following link will take you to one of those discussions. Perhaps Tree and/or Hostage will indulge you with additional references, however, we both know that your insistence on primary sources is a debating tactic, nothing more. link to mondoweiss.net
FREDBLOGS- I certainly hope that you are including the pre-state Zionist leadership in your comment about “the world did nothing to save the Jews.” Actually, since the non-Zionist world was fighting the Nazis while the Zionists were terrorizing the Arabs, the rest of the world seems to have done more than the Zionists. Not too surprising when you consider that without the Holocaust it seems unlikely that the Zionists could have created a Jewish state in Palestine. We have had numerous comments on Mondoweiss regarding Zionist efforts to discourage rescue efforts which I am sure you are aware of but choose to ignore. I leave you with a quote:
“When they come to us with two plans--the rescue of the masses of Jews in Europe or the redemption of the land--I vote, without a second thought, for the redemption of the land. The more said about the slaughter of our people, the greater the minimization of our efforts to strengthen and promote the Hebraisation of the land.” (Yitzhak Gruenbaum, Zionist official, quoted in “The Hidden History of Zionism” by Ralph Schoenman)
DENIS- “The Israeli Jews control the US government and the US Jews control the Israeli government??”
No, both governments respond to concentrated global and domestic power. In the case of Israel, however, there is a unique relationship between the Israeli elites, American Jewish Zionists, and the American/global elites. It is my view that the center of Zionist power is in the US with Israel being significantly influenced by American Jewish Zionist pressure. This influence is rarely for the good as American Jews seek an Israel of Biblical grandeur. Yitzhak Rabin’s small concessions wildly unpopular and stopped by his assassination. As Philip Weiss has noted, Israel is the way it is in no small measure due to the nature and extent of American Jewish support
PABELMONT- “Is this a suggestion that Jewish Bankers (sorry, I mean Jewish neocons toeing the American Model / so-called neoliberal line) control the world economy?”
No, not at all. There is a big difference between influence and control. The neocons are influential warmongers who are using their influence to encourage Netanyahu to get on board the program of neoliberalism. Neoliberalism is a project primarily of Wall Street with the cooperation of the IMF, World Bank, Treasury, Federal Reserve, etc. I have no way of knowing what percent of the financial elites are Jewish or, more significantly, to what extent the financial elites are Zionists. As a general rule, most of the super elites are “me-firsters.”
“He was responding to the latest annual International Monetary Fund report on Israel, which showed that inequality has worsened significantly over the past two decades and that Israel is now one of the three IMF members with the worst inequality.”
To provide a little historical perspective, it should be noted that in 1996 a group of neocons led by Richard Perle prepared a study for Netanyahu titled “A Clean Break: A New Strategy for Securing the Realm.” Little discussed were the economic recommendations which follow:
“As outlined in another Institute report, Israel can become self-reliant only by, in a bold stroke rather than in increments, liberalizing its economy, cutting taxes, relegislating a free-processing zone, and selling-off public lands and enterprises — moves which will electrify and find support from a broad bipartisan spectrum of key pro-Israeli Congressional leaders, including Speaker of the House, Newt Gingrich.”
In short, the neocons were recommending to fellow neocon Netanyahu that he pursue neoliberalism, which he and succeeding governments did with the predictable results. Yet another example of the incestuous relationship between Israeli Zionists and American Jewish Zionists. Some Israelis may well object to the undue influence of the American Jewish lobby on Israeli politics.
DAVID GREEN- Very nice analysis which will probably be attacked by the lobby-centric Mondoweissers, who will likely inundate us all with voluminous neocon quotes to “prove” that we did it for Israel, with empire and geostrategy playing no part in deliberations. This is what I refer to as proof by labeling. First you label the neocons as Israel Firsters, then proceed to adduce causation based upon the label.
A good example of this is when Stephen Walt says that “Professor Mearsheimer and I made it clear in our article and especially in our book that the idea of invading Iraq originated in the United States with the neoconservatives, and not with the Israeli government.” He then goes on to say that steadfast support for Israel is “a key tenet of neoconservatism.” In other words, neocons are always assumed to be agents of Israel even when they have to sell the idea to Israel because “Prime Minister Ariel Sharon and other Israeli officials were initially skeptical of this scheme….” Once convinced, however, “they became enthusiastic supporters of the idea of invading Iraq once the Bush administration made it clear to them that Iraq was just the first step in a broader campaign of “regional transformation” that would eventually include Iran.” (Stephen Walt)
Once convinced, the Israel lobby swung into action providing the Bush administration with lobbying support, and in providing a plethora of “evidence” for lobby fetishists to “prove” that the Israel lobby pressured Uncle Sam to attack Iraq. Of course, the “lobby-made-us-do-it” crowd needs to turn a blind eye to voluminous facts on the ground like over 750 US military bases world wide to project strategic power, over 60 years of non-stop war against the entire Third World to sustain Western global hegemony, and denial of the strategic importance of oil, gas, and other natural resources historically controlled by force.
The question of lobby power is contingent upon how one defines “the lobby.” If one includes everyone with a bias towards Israel into a catchall “lobby,” the net effect is to include what Finkelstein would consider domestic concentrations of power. Not only does this exaggerate lobby power, but it implies a dubious relationship between “the lobby” and the government of Israel, with Israel, in effect, running the empire out of Tel Aviv, a ludicrous scenario. The actual situation is much more complex. A certain symbiosis has occurred in which Israel has become an integral part of empire, the lobby functioning to a considerable extent as an imperial lobby, providing appreciated service to the military-industrial complex and other domestic centers of power in our warfare state. Additionally, it is not a one way street. The lobby, American Zionists, and organized American Jewry have considerable influence over Israeli society and policies, usually for the worse. As Phil has noted, Israel is the way it is in no small measure due to the nature and extent of American Jewish support.
IRA GLUNTS- “Some attitudes are not subject to the influence of rationality.”
When forced to choose between group ideology and empirical reality, MOST people opt for defending group ideology. Further, all ideologies to a certain extent deviate from empirical reality so as to form a unique group outlook which both harmonizes group perceptions and binds the group together in solidarity. Given the importance of groups for human development and of the essential nature of ideology as group unifier, it may well be that what raised humans up from the other animals was the invention of bullshit, which, to this day, makes the world go round.
“I believe in the notion of a Jewish and democratic state, for all the complexity such a juxtaposition entails.”
Jeez, Phil, you say this guy is an expert on religion and morality? Then is one to assume that he is either delusional or a bald faced liar? The religious Jews in Israel are not liberal Reformed Jews. They are mostly Orthodox fundamentalists, a throwback to Classical Judaism where the Talmudic ideology absolutely forbade anything remotely resembling democracy for non-Jews in the “Holly Land.” There are a lot of Talmudic instructions concerning Goyim in the Land of Israel which absolutely require discrimination. So, while liberal American Jews can talk endlessly about Jewish and democratic (a contradiction even in secular terms), surely they must be aware that the religious Jews of Israel would never tolerate such a thing. Look what happened to Yitzhak Rabin for making even a small compromise.
DON- “That evidence may very well exist…but I haven’t seen it yet.”
The “evidence” consists mostly of out of context quotes involving intemperate language used to basically misrepresent Atzmon. Unfortunately, he has in the past been needlessly provocative for whatever reason. Actually, he differentiates between those who consider their “Jewishness” (however defined) as but a part of their overall identity versus those who put their “Jewish-ness” as their primary focus. The difference between an American who is Jewish versus a Jew living in the US. His views are somewhat close to Israel Shahak who considered Zionism as a retrograde form of Classical Judaism, an attempt to avoid the enlightenment and assimilation.
THEO- I had the same question and tried playing around. On the left at the bottom of the little blocks it says "show all comments." You need to click on that to see the "old" comments and to comment on them, which I just did to answer you. I have some reservations about this new "benefit."
WOW- The change in comment display is just terrific. I can no longer attach a comment to a comment. When I log in to comment, all of the comments dissappear! When I click on "show comment," nothing happens, hence, I comment at the bottom of the thread or forget about it. Whose idea was this?
SEAFOID- I’m with you on this one. Phil seems to have rejected Jewish choseness in favor of American exceptionalism. A true red, white and blue liberal. And this even as Chris Hedges talks about the death of the liberal class in this age of neoliberal globalization. In his quest for inner meaning, one is inclined to give Phil the benefit of the doubt in regards to what might be interpreted as an emotionally manipulative tribute to the shining city on the hill. Needless to say, the post is wildly popular.
HOPHMI- Generally I ignore you, however, sometimes you are so outrageous that a response is called for.
“Most of world stood silent when 6 million Jews were killed in the Holocaust, so I don’t really give much weight to world opinion.”
Funny, I was under the impression that most of the world was at war, not “standing silent.” By the way, when was the last time you grieved over the 54 million Goyim that died in WWII?
“Most of world does business with China, so I can’t say most of the world has much credibility when it comes to human rights.”
Are you suggesting that Israel doesn’t do business with China? And when it comes to ’doing business,’ I’m sure you are aware of Israel’s military exports to various and sundry dictatorships and the training and arms they provided to South American ’death squad democracies.’
Hypocrisy, thy name is Hophmi!
There is a certain Kafkaesque quality to this whole situation. Looked at from a purely rational perspective, there shouldn’t be much of a problem. If Israel simply became a state of all of its citizens, what would happen? Hopefully, the Palestinians would suffer less, however, is there anyone who doesn’t understand that Jews would basically be in control for the foreseeable future? What happened in South Africa? White politicians who were in the pockets of local white oligarchs and transnational corporations were replaced by black politicians who are in the pockets of local white oligarchs and transnational corporations. Okay, a few black oligarchs emerged. Fundamentally, little of substance changed.
In the case of Israel, the same logic would prevail. There is, however, one huge obstacle: Zionism. It poisons the air both in Israel and the US. In Israel, there are the religious fundamentalists who feel that giving up so much as one inch of the “sacred soil” is a sin against God almighty. Rationality plays no role. In the US, the center of Zionist power, the same Zionist fundamentalism prevails, less concerning biblical imperatives, but more concerning induced fears of anti-Semitism and annihilation. Concerns so far beyond rationality as to be almost unbelievable. It is difficult to listen to the racist fear mongering of a Benjamin Kerstein, Debbie Schlussel or Pamela Geller and not wonder if they really believe what they say. Is it possible to believe things so irrational? And these are well educated people. They are also ideologues and propagandists. And based upon some of the reported comments of the members of the Park Slope Co-op, the increasingly cult-like ideology of Zionism remains potent. Rational argument falls on deaf ears as ideology triumphs. It is difficult to see a good way out of this.
“You were swept away by Ruth Wisse’s thesis that liberals betrayed the Jewish cause by believing too much in rational universalism and failing to acknowledge the unique, everlasting threat of anti-Semitism.”
Fascinating thesis. For starters, the “unique, everlasting threat of anti-Semitism.” is a defining myth of classical Judaic religious ideology, totally incapable of withstanding any objective historical scrutiny. It is, however, a core belief in current Zionist ideology. So much so that any weakening of this belief among Zionist Jews would tend to weaken tribal solidarity as well. An existential threat to Jewish tribalism, hence, anti-Semitic by definition among the true believers! Yet another example of how the logic of group mythology/ideology tends to overwhelm independent rationality. I refer to this as the logic of irrationality.
DAN CROWTHER- Thanks, but I feel that I need to come to the defense of Max ajl and set the record straight. During our exchange, he seemed to conclude that I probably wasn’t an anti-Semite, merely stupid. Needless to say, I was greatly relieved.
LIBRA- “Whenever Mondoweiss publishes a post like this, you can rely on Dan and Keith to pop up like Tweedledum and Tweedledee with their “big picture” or “strategic view” to let Israel off the hook.”
Let Israel off the hook? Obviously you are delusional. Israel is an intrinsic part of empire. Or do you deny there is an empire? Sorry if reality conflicts with your ideology, but that is your problem, not mine. Please feel free to continue your myopic focus on “the lobby” as the center of the universe, the empire a figment of Chomskyite imagination. All sorts of things going down right now, few of which originate in Tel Aviv.
DAN CROWTHER- I’m with you on this one. When discussing Azerbaijan, to simply mention Israel is to miss the big picture. It should be US/Israel/NATO. The eastward expansion of US/NATO into this geo-strategically important area means that Israel is not acting alone. I provide a link to a Pepe Escobar article concerning US/NATO versus Putin and the Shanghai Cooperation Organization. link to dissidentvoice.org
Also, the need for both the US and Israel to maintain “credibility” should not be underestimated. It has been a consistent theme in US foreign policy calculations. The Godfather gets his way in no small measure through intimidation. Finally, to emphasize the extent to which the empire relies upon military force, I provide a link to a Juan Cole article with a very interesting map of US bases surrounding Iran. In my opinion, if US/NATO/Israel does not achieve some significant success in regards to Iran, then the empire could unravel rapidly. link to zcommunications.org
CHU- The Rabbi is correctly applying Orthodox Talmudic instructions. What I have continued to stress is the degree to which American Reformed Jews and others have no real appreciation for the teachings of Classical Judaism, and how this impacts the religious Jews of Israel.
From “Jewish History, Jewish Religion,” by Israel Shahak: “Therefore, the concept of adultery also does not apply to intercourse between a Jewish man and a Gentile woman; rather the Talmud equates such intercourse to the sin of bestiality…..This does not imply that sexual intercourse between a Jewish man and a Gentile woman is permitted- quite the contrary. But the main punishment is inflicted on the Gentile woman; she must be executed, even if she was raped by the Jew: ‘If a Jew has coitus with a Gentile woman, whether she be a child of three or an adult, whether married or unmarried, and even if he is a minor aged only nine years and one day- because he had willful coitus with her, she must be killed as is the case of a beast, because through her a Jew got into trouble.’”
Could the teachings of Classical Judaism have contributed to historical anti-Semitism? Is it anti-Semitic to even ponder the question?
KRAUSS- I think that you are missing an essential aspect of the Travon Martin case which is that without the black journalists the case would have disappeared from sight. The fact that most black murder victims are killed by other blacks is irrelevant. The fact that a young unarmed black youth was shot to death by a self-styled vigilante with no investigation performed is indicative of ongoing lethal racism. The ongoing slaughter of blacks and other minorities by police and vigilantes is a national shame. One more reason why I take umbrage at all of the emphasis on “anti-Semitism.” American Jews have never experienced anything comparable to blacks, Hispanics, Muslims, native Americans, and undocumented aliens. Not that they should, but lets keep things in perspective.
PHIL- “Dan I believe he apologized.”
Overall, I liked the post, however, here I’m with Dan. I am not intimately familiar with Beinart so I wonder what exactly he “apologized” for? Was it for being a public intellectual who misrepresents reality in service to power, who misrepresented the war as other than an immoral imperial depredation, to be opposed by everyone who has a sense of common decency? Or was it because it was a “mistake” which was not in the best interest of empire? Birds of a feather flock together. Careful who you cozy up to.
PABELMONT- “And, from his viewpoint (not mine! I married a Quaker Christian Palestinian, so there!), intermarriage is some sort of a sin.”
Assimilation and intermarriage are not the same thing. It is hardly necessary to intermarry to abandon tribalism for universalism. The Rabbi is strongly opposed to any weakening of the Jewish tribe, whether or not it involves intermarriage. From his perspective, support for Israel and birthright tours are good things because they reinforce Jewish solidarity, the essence of Jewish-ness.
Folks, it has got to be said. There is a strong Jewish/Zionist presence in the organized anti-Muslim/clash of civilizations outpourings. Check out Justin Raimondo’s link to the anti-Muslim demonstration at Yorba Linda, promoted by Rabbi David Eliezrie of Chabad-Yora Linda, Pamella Geller, the Tea Party and Republican “conservatives.” Listen to the remarks of Villa Park Councilwoman Debra Pauly. Check out this link of “Conservative political commentator, radio talk show host, columnist, and attorney” and anti-terrorism “expert” Debbie Schlussel defending Pauly from the “bullying” Muslims who would silence her. link to debbieschlussel.com
Be sure to check out her bio, this “attorney and a frequent New York Post and Jerusalem Post columnist,” who “went undercover, dressed as a religious Muslim woman, to the Islamic Center of America, North America’s largest mosque, and reported, in The Detroit News on its support for terrorism, and anti-American, anti-Semitic hate.”
“A frequent speaker at conservative, pro-Israel, and Jewish conferences, gatherings, college campuses, and events around the U.S. Schlussel was a featured speaker at the 2004 National Board Meeting of JINSA (Jewish Institute for National Security Affairs), 2004 National Conference of the Zionist Organization of America (ZOA), 2001 and 2002 NRA Annual Meetings, 2002 Alpha Epsilon Pi (AEPi) Fraternity National Convention, and 2000 Toward Tradition Conference.”
The point of all of this is that with this much organized Jewish anti-Muslim activity, and anti-Muslim hatred in the US, I have little patience with those who continually search out examples of anti-Semitism which pale in comparison with what is going on here.
HOSTAGE- One of the more interesting things about the quote you provided is that this is not the language of a dispirited leader of a downtrodden people. He speaks of nationhood and empire. His call for a nation as a launching pad for future conquest was echoed by David Ben Gurion years later when he advocated for accepting the UN partition as the first step in acquiring the whole of Palestine.
ZIONISM is the ideology which justified the creation of a Jewish state in Palestine and which now justifies maintaining Israel as a Jewish state. It is the ideology which underpins organized global Jewish support for Israel. That the ideology has undergone changes in response to changing circumstances is not unusual, nor has it changed the essence of the situation. Concocting a new label for this ideology strikes me as a form of subterfuge.
“TRIBEFEST”- Not exactly subtle.
“YOUNG, JEWISH AND PROUD”- Seems like they should fit right in.
SIN NOMBRE- If Holocaust consciousness included recognition of the long history of mass-murder to achieve elite objectives, it would be great. Unfortunately, remembrances of the Jewish Holocaust serve to both trivialize historical non-Jewish suffering and mass-murder, and to provide ideological justification for Zionist depredations. Under these circumstances, this selective memory helps to replicate in general terms that which it opposes in specific terms, hence, no good has ever or will ever come of it.
KLAUS BLOEMKER- Your point is very well taken. The US holocaust museums are a direct consequence of Jewish Zionist power. They do not in any manner shape or form deal with the fact that throughout history mass-murder has been the rule, not the exception. The failure of the US to establish museums acknowledging the genocide of the native Americans, as well as the slavery and death-by-attrition of the black slaves which formed the backbone of the start of the industrial revolution through the manufacture of cotton textiles, is indicative of the fact that the elites highlight what it suites them to highlight and ignore what it suites them to ignore. The US is an empire engaged in virtually non-stop warfare against the entire Third World and the doctrinal system supports and justifies this.
And, as “Without Walls” indicates, the World War II Allies are guilty of monstrous war crimes. The fact that these pale in comparison to Axis war crimes does not relieve us of the responsibility to acknowledge that which occurred and to recognize that war itself is inherently a brutal, criminal activity. This is particularly relevant both to Israel, a warfare state, and to the US, the primary warfare state. As we rightly criticize others, we must not turn a blind eye to our own actions.
Uri Avnery has an interesting related article over at CounterPunch. I provide one sentence and the link.
“Yeshayahu Leibowitz, an observant Jew, said years ago that the Jewish religion had practically died 200 years ago, and that the only thing that unites all Jews now is the Holocaust.”
link to counterpunch.org
AMERICAN- No, what I am saying is that the early Zionists deluded themselves that the world’s Jews would all come to Israel, however, the reality is that Israel could not exist in its present configuration without a powerful, supportive Jewish Diaspora.
AMERICAN- “What is the end game of the zionist goal….”
Impossible to know, but fun to speculate about. First of all, I seriously doubt that the early Zionists anticipated the current state of affairs. Like all long term undertakings, the process alters to changing circumstances. In my view, a huge change occurred as a result of the shift of power from European Zionists to American Jewish Zionists. I think that the influence of these American Zionists on Israeli society and official policies is underappreciated on Mondoweiss.
The bottom line is that I am not sure that there is an end game. It seems to me that Israel and Zionism represent a process whereby Jewish nationalism combined with an overreaction to a cultivated sense of eternal anti-Semitism has reunited world Jewry previously split by religious differences and assimilationist tendencies. In other words, as long as Israel is continually at war with her neighbors, dependent upon American Jewish Zionist support which, in turn, unites American Zionist Jews organizationally, and can be used as a symbolic victim of Jew hatred and as a potential oasis from eternal anti-Semitism, then it is fulfilling its Zionist function. That the Jewish state has become dependent upon the Diaspora to remain a Jewish state is obvious in hindsight, but not to those at the time pursuing an illusion and engaging in self-deception.
MOOSER- You are quite correct. The social media appears to be an integral part of intelligence operations, gathering user supplied information while replacing the mass media as a source of propaganda. Kony 2012 an excellent example of misinformation designed to facilitate a new “humanitarian” intervention. The notion that the elites would take a hands off approach to this new source of information power a pipe dream. I have come to the conclusion that most humans have a virtually unlimited capacity for self-deception. Present company excluded, of course.
DAN CROWTHER- re: Jared Cohen and Wael Ghonim. Your observation is correct, but regrettably not obvious to nearly enough folks. Uncle Sam finances the Egyptian military and the opposition, just in case. Having both sides dependent upon American funding tends to result in imperial control regardless of superficial changes. And, yes, the social media is more-or-less integrated into US psy-ops. All of the Eastern European “color revolutions” have been orchestrated by the US. Yugoslavia was a test case for much of this.
For those interested, a very interesting article about this by Pam Martens over at CounterPunch. Here are a couple of quotes followed by the link:
“In the last decade, Wall Street has evolved from predator to organized crime with a speed dial to Washington. Instead of Washington reforming Wall Street, it has seduced and corrupted Washington. It didn’t have to come to this.”
“On Wednesday, March 14, Greg Smith – following in the proud lineage of Micheal Lewis, Frank Partnoy and Nomi Prins – simply bypassed the tedious route of galleys and nit-picking editors and went straight to the OpEd page of the New York Times with his resignation letter decrying Goldman Sachs for abusing its clients.”
link to counterpunch.org
YOURSTRULY- “also revealing is the success story of the bank of north carolina, owned and operated by the people of that state. as it should and must it serves the interest of north dakota’s people and businesses.”
Perhaps you inadvertently wrote “bank of north carolina” for bank of North Dakota? In any event, state banks are both good and obvious, however, the Bank of North Dakota provides funds for the local private banks and does not compete. As for other states, I seriously doubt that Wall Street will sit idly by as new state banks are created. Here in Washington, efforts to create a state bank are going nowhere fast, not surprising considering the power of the street. They don’t call Goldman-Sachs the Vampire Squid for nothing. I seriously doubt that any state has the power to break free any more than Greece does. As for private banks and the Fed, the Fed should be part of the government not private, and the whole financial system needs to be publicly controlled. No easy task considering that the financial sector effectively runs the empire.
SPEAKING OF WALL STREET- How could I let this opportunity pass me by to discuss the global financial system? Interesting article on CounterPunch concerning a type of derivative known as interest rate swaps. Seems that state and local governments entered into these swaps to protect themselves from rising interest rates. Seems that with low interest rates, state and local governments are now obligated to PAY WALL STREET due to the low rates. Does the Fed take care of “the street,” or what? First a quote, then a final comment.
“Today interest rate swaps make up 82% of the total market in derivatives, measured by total notional amounts. This is partly the result of governments all over the world entering into interest rate swaps, agreeing to tie cash flows to trillions of notional dollars. What's key is that none of this has required duplicity or reckless greed on the part of bankers at Goldman Sachs or other firms. Let's be clear; this is a structural transformation of capitalism on a global scale, and it has sucked up all corporate and government entities into the new logic of hedging and efficiency. That a few powerful financial corporations have placed themselves in strategic positions to benefit from this structural shift should come as no surprise.”
link to counterpunch.org
Notice the comment “…and it has sucked up all corporate and government entities into the new logic of hedging and efficiency.” What this refers to is that the global financial system is so inherently unstable that these inadequately funded “hedges” are necessary to assuage doubts about systemic risk. This risk is an inherent part of a privately controlled financial system run by profit seeking banksters. This private system has become increasingly disassociated from the real economy, profits accruing increasingly from speculation on financial instruments. Financialization. Things are bad and getting worse.
In “Overcoming Zionism,” Joel Kovel dedicates the book to his Aunt Betty “And to Rachel Corrie, may her name live in glory”
Yes, may her name live in glory!
SOME ADDITIONAL THOUGHTS- What can’t be emphasized enough is that the reaction to Atzmon is far more significant and instructive than the man himself. Don’t get me wrong, I like Atzmon, but I don’t consider him all that unique or significant.
I have come to conclude that this ongoing Atzmon brouhaha reflects the extent to which perceived anti-Semitism/Jewish victim-hood is the essential group unifier of those who self-identify as Jews. Once upon a time, a “Jew” was religiously defined. This was the era of Classical Judaism, very different from Reformed Judaism or secular “Jewishness,” although many modern Jews seem unaware of that reality. In “The Wandering Who?”, Gilad Atzmon quotes Uri Avnery: “Yeshayahu Liebowitz, the philosopher who was an observant Orthodox Jew, told me once: ‘The Jewish religion died 200 years ago. Now there is nothing that unifies the Jews around the world apart from the Holocaust.’” The Holocaust depicted not so much as a historical event comparable to other instances of mass murder, but as the symbol and ultimate proof of eternal anti-Semitism and Jewish victim-hood.
Most Jews, protestations of anti-Semitism notwithstanding, view being a Jew as a positive thing. There are material and psychological benefits to being part of a privileged group, particularly one which can claim eternal victim-hood thereby deflecting all criticism and inquiry. As such, perceived anti-Semitism performs a unifying function and is eagerly sought out. Not real anti-Semitism, which is threatening, but relatively innocuous instances which can be misrepresented and blown all out of proportion. Why else would so many Jews surf the web looking for “anti-Semitic” websites, and know the names of “anti-Semitic” authors? A lot of effort seems to go into this, at least in some quarters, and since there is very little true anti-Semitism the rewards must lie elsewhere. In other words, attacking Atzmon primarily serves to promote Jewish solidarity and reinforce group mythology. Why else call so much attention to Gilad if not to wildly inflate the threat of anti-Semitism?
It must be said that Atzmon has been intentionally provocative towards the Jewish left, particularly the Jewish Marxists. In his essay, “Tribal Marxism for Dummies,” he writes that “Jewish Marxism is basically a crude utilisation of ‘Marxist-like’ terminology for the sole purpose of the Jewish tribal cause. It is a Judeo-centric pseudo intellectual setting which aims at political power.” He continues, mixing together valid insights with some petty and contentious comments about Moshe Machover. He concludes with the following: “What is the secular basis of Judaism? Practical need, self-interest. What is the worldly religion of the Jew? Huckstering. What is his worldly God? Money. Very well then! Emancipation from huckstering and money, consequently from practical, real Judaism, would be the self-emancipation of our time.” Gilad Atzmon said that? No, Karl Marx said that. Having mercilessly critiqued Jewish “Tribal Marxism,” he ends with a statement by their icon Karl Marx which some might characterize as “anti-Semitic.” He figuratively spits in their face. Jewish Marxists loathe Gilad Atzmon. They can’t help themselves.
CHU- First of all, thanks for the link to Gurvitz. I loved it. It was everything that a deliciously nasty polemic should be. My kind of guy! You’re right. If he ever gets on some folks radar screen, he’ll be pilloried. Both Atzmon and Gurvitz are generally consistent with Israel Shahak who endured more than his fair share of abuse. I followed your link to Max ajl. Small wonder this Jewish Marxist loathes the author of “Tribal Marxism for Dummies.” (see my comment below) I have no idea what became of Avi.
LORDY, LORDY, here we go again. Another Gilad Atzmon stoning! Why, oh why, do folks feel threatened by Atzmon? I’m not. And if I’m not, Phil and Adam and a whole bunch of others shouldn’t be either. As I commented previously, ‘In many ways, the most significant thing about Gilad Atzmon is the reaction to Gilad Atzmon. There is nothing about him which can possibly explain the extent of the vitriol and demonization.’ For example, recently we had a thread on Yossi Gurvitz. You know, ‘Yossi, Yossi, he’s our man, if he can’t do it, no one can!’ On the “Liberal American Jews are Giving Themselves Permission to Say Goodbye” thread, CHU linked to a 2007 Gurvitz screed (I loved it, but that is another story). All of you Atzmon bashers need to read this and incorporate it into you thinking. link to ygurvitz.wordpress.com
Final comment: I am sick and tired of all of this “anti-Semitism” BS. Of all of the racisms, anti-Semitism is toward the bottom of the ‘threat list.’ There is more to this obsession than the understandable defensiveness of a weak and defenseless minority. The Jews are not a weak and defenseless minority. Far from it. They are an integral part of the US power structure. Some of the worst offenders in this are the Jewish Marxists who utilize theories of economic determinism to mask the presence and impact of Jewish tribal solidarity, a factor, along with others, which they deny even exists. Lastly, Gilad Atzmon, along with Yossi Gurvitz and Israel Shahak, are/were informed by their experiences in Israel. For all practical purposes, there are no Reformed Jews in Israel. Primarily, just secular and various shades of Orthodox. Reformed American Jews seem incapable of understanding the extent to which Israeli “Jewishness” is alien to American “Jewishness,” hence, overreact to what Atzmon says. This unwholesome American Jewish obsession with “anti-Semitism” is something which needs to change if there is to be any dialogue, understanding, or progress.
SEAFOID- “The West is going to dump Israel. Like they dumped South Africa.”
Dumped South Africa? Why wasn’t I Informed? All this time I have been under the impression that the white South African elites who ruled the country alongside the transnational corporations with a subservient a white government, continued to do so with a subservient black government. I thought that fundamentally nothing changed except the outward face of exploitation. Was I wrong?
“What about Libya, you led that.”
“No, that was the U.S. It was the GCC [the Gulf Cooperation Council] then the Arab League. But it was all orchestrated.”
This is exactly what I said at the time. Libya was a US initiated regime change disguised as a humanitarian intervention.
ANNIE- Your recent activity and prominence on Mondoweiss seems to have led you to believe that you have simultaneously acquired instantaneous expertise. You haven’t.
The article by Paul Craig Roberts briefly but accurately describes the process of off-shoring and de-industrialization which has been going on for over 30 years. The whole process can be summarized as neo-liberal globalization, and involves both privatization and financial penetration and control. It predates the War on Terror, which, in fact, is a pretext for accelerating the process already underway. The prime movers behind this appear to be the financial sector. The main weapon used to get corporate compliance is through pressure involving stock price which Roberts mentions but which you apparently don’t understand. Likewise, the article you linked from “Moon of Alabama” involves speculation regarding oil prices as a consequence of the sanctions. It has no relevance to the Roberts article. The fact that you think that your link “chewed the hell out of his theory,” indicates a profound lack of understanding on this issue.
I could go on, but why bother? You have no interest in rational discussion, rather you see your role as a defender of the Mondoweiss narrative. As such, you contribute to the echo chamber effect. “The War of Ideas in the Middle East” is turning into “the conformity of opinion regarding the control of US foreign policy by the lobby.” Pity.
ANNIE- “keith, speaking of ignoring comments i responded to one of yours here: link to mondoweiss.net you completely ignored it.”
Thomson responded to my comment by ignoring the substance and instead alleging that “Keith, you can always be relied on to jump in as Apologist for the Israel Lobby. In your other role as Imperialist-Globalist Slayer, try to remember what you have said here before: It’s all connected, man. Most people who comment (or post) here seem to be much more concerned than you about the aggressions and transgressions of the Israel Lobby. You might as well accept that and try your best to explain why you wish to excuse it.”
He didn’t ignore the comment, he ignored the substance of the comment even as he attacked me personally as an “Apologist for the Israel Lobby.” That is what I refer to as attack dog mode. Did I attack you based upon your comment? You can’t see the difference? As for your comment itself, not only am I not sure what “WOT” stands for, but it was not my intent to get in a lengthy discussion of the Paul Craig Roberts article. It was simply an example of offshoring and the ongoing de-industrialization of the US which has been going on for quite a while. A process which belies any interest by Wall Street or Obama in dealing “…more assertively with China-- say, by insisting that it reinvest its dollars here so as to grow American jobs.” I have neither the time nor inclination to go into detail about how China is constrained from making massive investments in the US economy, literally forced to accumulate treasuries to support their export oriented economy.
“also by saying the comments here ‘are so far beyond the pale’ you do realize you are effectively insulting (attacking) all of us.”
I continue to be surprised by how thin-skinned some folks are. I make a general comment concerning my subjective impression as to the post and comments in general and you take exaggerated umbrage. First of all, I am not insulting nor “attacking” everybody. I can’t make a general comment without you taking offense? Perhaps you tend to take offense mostly with those you disagree with?
Thomson Rutherford- I just noticed that I inadvertently misspelled your name, then continued to do so. Sorry, it wasn't intentional.
BRUCE WOLMAN- Thompson Rutherford said: “It’s something I and some others have been saying here for years: The U,S, special relationship with Israel is the controlling factor in determining American foreign policy – wherever. It chooses our political leaders and top government officials. It works to blanket our government in secrecy and misinformation. It promotes public ignorance and manipulates public passions for its own foul ends. “It” is the special relationship pressed on America by ‘friends of Israel.’”
Do you agree with this?
THOMPSON- “And I’m sure you didn’t really mean it when you said I have an extremely narrow ideological focus.”
Wrongo. You have a laser-like focus on the lobby and accuse others who take a more global perspective as apologists for the lobby. In my original comment, I made several brief statements on neo-liberal globalization, off shoring and de-industrialization, and the use of debt as a means to force structural adjustment. You didn’t mention any of this, preferring instead to (mis)characterize what I said as a defense of the lobby. This in spite of your professed interest in economic issues and political economy.
“How many times must I assure you: You are not more anti-capitalist than I. Nor more anti-imperialist or anti-globalist or anti-corporatist or anti-Oil or anti-fascist or anti-war or anti-neoliberal “American consensus” or anti-PHARMA, etc.”
Methinks you doth protest too much. The only time I see you discussing these things is when you defensively claim to believe them. When I brought up some of these issues in my original comment, you claimed that by doing so I was a lobby apologist, a ludicrous assertion which you have made in the past. You wear your narrow focus on your sleeve, claims of universality notwithstanding.
“If you want your thinking to be relevant about I/P and America’s misadventures in the Middle East, you need to take the Israel lobby more seriously.”
I take the lobby plenty seriously. I just don’t think that it is the center of the universe or the fount of all evil. And as for a firmer grounding in mainstream economics, it is my belief that mainstream economists basically earn their living misrepresenting reality in service to power. Economics is at least 90% ideology in disguise. I prefer the likes of Michael Hudson and Michel Chossudovsky, etc. As for your reading suggestions, based upon your past comments to me, I can’t help but believe that your motivation is less than a sincere desire for my intellectual betterment.
THOMPSON- No, I do not think that OVERALL the problems mentioned by Bruce Wolman are primarily a consequence of some overemphasis on Israel. I think that his analysis of some of these issues is quite mistaken. His whole analysis of the China trade issue is contentious in the extreme. I’ve made a few brief comments on this on this thread which, of course, you ignored. You might try to discuss some of my comments rather than continue in attack dog mode implying that I am an apologist for the lobby. Even there you provide no examples or proof, simply asserting that “This goes beyond your apparent role as defender of the Israel lobby.” Please, give us all some examples of me defending the lobby. You can’t, because I haven’t.
SEAFOID- The goal of terminal financialization is to lock-in global corporate/financial control. Global oligarchy. Each area is to have its specialized function, none strong enough to challenge corporate/financial control. Why would Wall Street want to preserve manufacturing in the US when they can utilize Chinese labor at slave wages? Capital transcends national borders. There has been a lot written about this. I provide one link to Paul Craig Roberts as an introduction.
link to counterpunch.org
SIN NOMBRE- Bruce Wolman’s whole post conveyed the impression that overall our problems are adversely effected by overemphasis on pursuing Israel’s agenda. It would take much too long to rebut him point by point, however, if you compare my comment to his post you can see a huge difference in interpretation.
THOMPSON- “Keith, you can always be relied on to jump in as Apologist for the Israel Lobby.”
Thompson, you can always be relied upon to de facto excuse the empire by radically de-emphasizing the role of domestic concentrations of power in policy formation. Imperial policy has been a long time in the making, the US didn’t get to be an empire by subsuming its imperial ambitions to Israel, which, in fact, is an integral part of empire. To continue to argue that Israel and the lobby are both alien and all-powerful is to succumb to the delusion that they can be excised from the body politic and everything will be hunky dory. Furthermore, it gives wildly excessive weight to the political system while ignoring the overwhelming influence of global capital. One would have thought that Wall Street, the military-industrial complex and big oil could have put up a better fight if they opposed lobby control and policies harmful to them. Finally, it ignores the reality that the lobby also functions as an imperial lobby. As Norman Finkelstein notes:
“For Israel’s new American Jewish ‘supporter,’ however, such talk bordered on heresy: an independent Israel at peace with its neighbors was worthless; an Israel aligned with currents in the Arab world seeking independence from the United States was a disaster. Only an Israeli Sparta beholden to American power would do, because only then could US Jewish leaders act as spokesmen for American imperial ambitions.” (Norman Finkelstein)
Let me conclude by saying that I have never heard anyone other than a diehard Zionist act as an apologist for the Israel lobby. This is simply your way of dismissing anyone who looks at political economy outside your extremely narrow ideological focus. It is the type of labeling and name calling which occurs much too frequently.
This analysis, and the reactions to it, are so far beyond the pale that I am reluctant to even comment. Suffice it to say that neo-liberal globalization is a global strategy pushed by US elites, primarily Wall Street. China is one big export platform for US and other transnational corporations, and is drowning in US treasuries. Offshoring jobs is part of neo-liberalism intended to de-industrialize the US, except for “defense.” All of the deficits are intentional and designed to create de facto debt servitude in the US similar to what was obtained in the Third World via the World Bank and IMF. We are undergoing a controlled demolition of the economy leading to terminal financialization. The notion that most of our problems can be traced back to “the lobby” and Israel is ludicrous.
“The United States offered Israel advanced weaponry in return for it committing not to attack Iran's nuclear facilities this year, Israeli daily Maariv reported on Thursday.
Citing unnamed Western diplomats and intelligence sources, the report said that during Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu's visit to Washington this week, the US administration offered to supply Israel with advanced bunker-busting bombs and long-range refuelling planes. In return, Israel would agree to put off a possible attack on Iran till 2013, after the US elections in November.”
link to news.yahoo.com
To pursue this a little further, I think this phenomenon of ideological fundamentalism is reflected in the thread on Netanyahu giving Obama the story of Esther. What is the purpose of highlighting an ancient myth? It would seem that rationality has given way to the logic of the myth. No need to bother with factual distortions when fairy tales can be quoted verbatim. And believed. Both in Israel and the US, a uniquely religious country among the industrial nations. It should be further noted that as neoliberalism spreads additional misery to the 99%, when people feel threatened, a defensive retreat into fundamentalism is virtually inevitable. Cheers.
“If you think this Judaism is the wisdom of Israel, it’s not. This is the Judaism forced underground by the Christian regimes, censored time and again. It’s coming to the surface.”
Israel Shahak discusses this in “Jewish History, Jewish Religion.” Around the 13th century, thanks to Jewish converts who translated, the Christian elites became aware of the extreme anti-Christian and anti-Gentile Talmudic writings in classical Judaism, and had the offending parts removed, or as actually occurred euphemized , Gentile replaced by idolater, heathen, etc. Now, in Israel, the euphemisms are being replaced with the original anti-Gentile phraseology.
Quoting Shahak: “The persistent attitude of classical Judaism toward non-Jews strongly influence its followers, Orthodox Jews and those who can be regarded as its continuators, Zionists…. Since 1967, as Israel becomes more and more 'Jewish', so its policies are influenced more by Jewish ideological considerations than by coldly conceived imperial interest.”
“Israel’s air force capabilities can’t do enough damage to destroy Iran’s nuclear program; they can slow it down but they can’t stop it,” says Walt. “Neither can we, although we can do a lot more damage.”
What a curious statement. As if Iran’s nuclear power program was the primary cause of our actions rather than an obvious pretext. True, if Iran had nuclear weapons to defend itself, that would restrict US/Israel’s freedom to commit aggression. However, the primary reason for our aggression against Iran has to do with US/Israel’s Middle East hegemony. With the completion of a couple of oil and gas pipelines involving Iran, the US ability to hold China hostage to the US for guaranteed access to energy resources will be compromised, and with it, significant geo-strategic leverage. The US has a narrow window of opportunity to reestablish effective control over access to Iranian oil and gas. And to exact retribution for the overthrow of the Shah and escaping US control. The Godfather likes to make examples. And then there is Israel, Saudi Arabia and the gulf monarchies seeking the destruction of Iran.
An attack would primarily focus on the Iranian air defenses, oil/gas fields and infrastructure in general, with the nuclear facilities thrown in for credibility. The plan would be basically to destroy the country as was done to Iraq in Gulf War I. If successful, Iran would be destroyed economically and militarily. The oil/gas would be brought back on line if and when the US decided to do so. It would not be necessary to occupy Iran, effective control achieved by the surrounding bases, including special operations forces, drones, etc. An attack would likely occur in the fall (October surprise?) or early next year. This option is both fraught with peril and a long time in the planning. Of course, the situation is highly volatile, predictions unreliable. However, should Iran escape imperial control, this would likely result in a major shift in the global power structure.
HOPHMI- “Was it queer when several dozens Jews in Hebron were murdered during the 1929 riots?”
You continue to amaze. Would you like to do a body count comparison of Palestinians versus Jews? If it was 10,000 Palestinians to one Jew, you would lament the one Jew. The Palestinians are unpeople to you. There is no other explanation.
The rather obvious way to insure that Iran doesn’t develop nuclear weapons is to establish the Middle East as a nuclear weapons free area. This is something Iran and most of the rest of the world supports, but which is opposed by US/Israel.
The ‘Emergency Committee for Israel’? What next, the war on anti-Semitism? What passes for reality has taken a Kafka-esque turn for the worse.
The increased militarization of our society is a direct consequence of neo-liberal globalization. Third World “structural adjustment” is now being imposed upon the First World as the Corporate/Financial elites consolidate their global control. The impoverishment of the majority will inevitably lead to civil unrest, which has been anticipated and planned for. Massive propaganda will no longer suffice to quell disillusionment. This will require increasing reliance on naked force. Liberty and empire are mutually exclusive. We live in dangerous times.
DAVID GREEN- “Also, for the record, I don’t advocate anyone being banned from Mondoweiss for any reason. Ever.”
Sorry, David, but I think your meaning is quite clear when you say “If that anti-semitic statement doesn’t get this person banned from Mondoweiss, then nobody should be banned–nobody.” And let’s not quibble over whether your real intent was to get Jeffrey and Witty reinstated.
As to the comment in question, I think that STEVIEB is overestimating the relative influence of Zionism in determining US geo-strategy, however, to casually jump to the conclusion of Jew hatred is totally unjustified. Furthermore, as I indicated, this is Phil and Adam’s responsibility, not yours or mine. Frankly, I am getting more than a little annoyed at the way some folks shriek anti-Semitism at the drop of a hat. I had a similar conversation with your buddy Max ajl here link to mondoweiss.net
I have two problems with all of this. The first is that any examination of political economy must deal with the question of power: who has it, how they got it, and how they keep it. The struggle for power is perhaps the key issue of our time. Jewish power and influence, including the role of Zionism as a group unifier, is a valid and essential area of inquiry. This is an area which Mondoweiss seeks to explore so that we may improve our understanding of those factors influencing Middle East policy, and to reflect upon overall political economy. It doesn’t help to have some folks trying to stifle the discussion of this historically sensitive area with charges of anti-Semitism.
The second problem I have should have been obvious from my initial comment. Anti-Gentile Chauvinism is the mirror image of anti-Semitism. It is racism, pure and simple. Yet, some Jews can’t seem to conceive of the notion that Jews can and do discriminate against Gentiles. The notion of Jewish victim hood so fundamental to their psyche that it goes unquestioned. Also, the notion of eternal Gentile anti-Semitism self-evident, not requiring proof. This is what Israel Shahak is trying to get at in the quote where he mentions a Jewish self-critique involving confronting the Jewish attitude to non-Jews.
DAVID GREEN- Let us begin with the part you left out: “It isn't only Jews who have been corrupted by the 'Chosen' dogma. Zionism and American imperialism are willing bedmates…”
One would have thought that the reference to US imperialism would have resonated with you, however, you chose to conflate Zionism with Jews and overreact. Fortunately for Mondoweiss, saner heads decide who to ban and who not to ban. In my almost two years of commenting, I have never suggested that another commenter be banned. I don’t feel that it is my place, or that it would be useful. That is Phil and Adam’s responsibility and, in my opinion, they have done a good job.
There is a bigger problem here. I have noticed the ease with which many Jews feel that it is their right to sit in judgment of Gentile behavior that is not to their ideological liking. How they are the ones to determine what constitutes anti-Semitism and what doesn’t. And how this frequently translates to anti-Gentile chauvinism whereby Gentile questioning and analysis of Jewish institutions, ideology and power is all too frequently met with almost casual charges of anti-Semitism. Unjustified charges of someone effectively being a “Jew hater” could be an indication that the accuser is in fact a crypto Gentile hater. And if an occasional anti-Semitic comment appears, so what? It’s not as if anti-Semitism is a big problem, is it? We shouldn’t be too vigorous in squelching discussion.
One of the areas that needs discussing is the Jewish attitude towards Gentiles. I am under the impression that is one of the areas which Mondoweiss seeks to explore, albeit in prudent fashion. It is certainly an area that the great Israel Shahak sought to pursue. “Therefore, the real test facing both Israeli and diaspora Jews is the test of their self-criticism which must include the critique of the Jewish past. The most important part of such a critique must be detailed and honest confrontation of the Jewish attitude to non-Jews.” (Israel Shahak, 1994)
HOSTAGE- Your comment provides support for Israel Shahak’s interpretation of events in “Jewish History, Jewish Religion: The Weight of Three Thousand Years.”
WALID- For what it is worth, your link to Francisco Gil-White got me interested, so I started reading. I quickly picked up some real bad vibes. A few clicks of the mouse and I discovered that Francisco is a global warming denier and a Philo-Semite who thinks that Israel gave away way too much at Oslo, and that the PLO has Nazi roots. I wouldn’t touch this guy with a ten foot pole.
MARCUS MOHR- “I’ve already had to choose my words carefully and I know that it’s just a matter of time before I get banned too.”
Ah, the joy of perceived victim-hood! A product of your upbringing, perhaps?
“Congratulations, you’ve done a huge disservice to free speech and your cause.”
Your heartfelt concern for the effectiveness of Mondoweiss moves me deeply.
PABELMONT- “Friend Keith: As to “Jewish anti-Gentile chauvinism”, shhh! Saying that’s per se anti-Semitism ….”
Over on the “ADL enlists city of Oakland to block Atzmon event” thread, Danaa indicates that in Israel she was taught essentially that “all goys are anti-semitic at heart, and cannot be trusted.” If this doesn’t represent Jewish anti-Gentile chauvinism, I don’t know what does. This attitude, that Gentiles are inherently irrational Jew haters, exists among many Jews in the US, particularly among Zionists. This is the mirror image of anti-Semitism, but never discussed. The notion that bringing it up may constitute an example of anti-Semitism indicates the prevalence of the bias. An unmentionable topic to be suppressed. Since you mentioned Shahak, a quote to buttress my point:
“Although the struggle against antisemitism (and of all other forms of racism) should never cease, the struggle against Jewish chauvinism and exclusivism , which must include a critique of classical Judaism, is now of equal or greater importance….Therefore, the real test facing both Israeli and diaspora Jews is the test of their self-criticism which must include the critique of the Jewish past. The most important part of such a critique must be detailed and honest confrontation of the Jewish attitude to non-Jews.” (Israel Shahak, JEWISH HISTORY, JEWISH RELIGION, 1994)
DAN CROWTHER- “Keith — come on man, thats not fair my brother.”
I didn’t mean to pick on you personally, but needed to make a point. It is counterproductive to argue that it makes no difference if the king is Jewish, when we need to emphasize that having a king- any king- is a recipe for disaster. So too with ownership. It is not a mark of progress that Jews are now a significant part of the capitalist elite, rather, it is counterproductive that we tolerate such powerful elites. The concentration of elite money power is as great or greater than it has ever been. We are in the midst of what may turn out to be a terminal class war being waged by the elites against everyone else. That some of these elites tend to view themselves as eternal victims is not encouraging. I guess what I am objecting to is what I perceive in our society as a certain complacency, an unquestioning acceptance of the distribution of power in our political economy. The very survival of the species may well hinge upon how we resolve the global struggle for power. So I used your comment as an excuse to climb upon my soapbox. No offense intended.
“…the Jewish narrative is still about vulnerability.”
Why is that? Why the dysfunctional focusing on Jewish “victim hood” and the lack of concern for Gentile vulnerability? Why the denial of Jewish anti-Gentile chauvinism?