Commenter Profile

Total number of comments: 1418 (since 2010-02-17 01:44:49)

Keith

Radical dissident. Retired.

Website: http://saskck.blogspot.com

Showing comments 1300 - 1201
Page:

  • The naked racism of 'Save Jewish Jerusalem'
    • YONAH FREDMAN- "That is essential for the survival of a non sovereign wandering group."

      Twenty-first century American Jews are nomadic? The non-Jewish population permanently settled in?

      YONAH FREDMAN- "Sovereign majority nations have the luxury of experimenting with porousness."

      Who is the "sovereign majority" in multicultural America? You are describing conditions that may have existed in medieval Europe but no longer apply (if they ever did). Small wonder that Israel Shahak considered Zionism a throwback to the Classical Judaism of medieval Europe! So, you consider the enlightenment a threat to Jewish kinship? And you left Israel and returned to the U.S. because only in America could you have your cake and eat it too!

    • HOPHMI- "Anti-Gentilism is an antisemitic trope. And that’s all it is. It should not be permitted on a site that forbids antisemitism."

      Yes, Massuh.

  • American Jewish identity: Moving beyond 'love for Israel' and the Holocaust
    • HOPHMI- "When people get together to go to the mosque or to go to church, are these examples of tribal solidarity for you?"

      No, they are not. Neither is attending a synagogue which is why Zionism evolved as a unifier of the Jews following the enlightenment and the splintering of Jews into secular Jews, Reform Jews, Conservative Jews, and Orthodox Jews. It is also why Roland Nikles seeks a replacement for Zionism to unite the Jews into a tribal peoplehood. This manufactured kinship has proved highly advantageous to organized Jews in our otherwise multicultural society. Zionist tribal solidarity transcends Judaic religious practice.

    • ROLAND NIKLES- "A sense of tribe and belonging to a tradition is part of Judaism…. and contrary to what you imply, tribal cohesion in tradition, is not all negative."

      Roland, you are talking in circles. If the center of Jewishness is Jewish traditions, then why do "non-Orthodox American Jews (need to) find a new center for their Jewish identity.”? You are trying to minimize Jewish tribal solidarity, currently centered on Zionism, as little more than honoring traditions. As if Sheldon Adelson, Haim Saban, AIPAC, and the Conference of Presidents of the Major Jewish Organizations were simply concerned with honoring traditions. That is BS and you know it. It is all about power. Why else would you feel the need to replace Zionism with some other means to maintain Jewish tribal solidarity? Not all bad? Certainly not for the Jews who preach multiculturalism while practicing tribalism.

      As for my "hostility," imputing anti-Jewish hostility to Gentiles who question Jewish behavior is a traditional reaction of Jewish tribalists. Why else would BDS and other criticism of Israeli behavior be labeled as anti-Semitism? Likewise, any discussion of Jewish power and communal behavior which facilitates Zionism and support for Israel also be labeled anti-Semitic? As for traditions enriching us, I agree that traditions can be enriching in a multicultural society, however, if simply observing traditions was your goal, why the felt need to find something else to replace Zionism as the new center for Jewish identity? You are clearly after something more, something to replace Zionism as a tribal unifier. And "traditions" which sanctify tribal separateness from the surrounding non-Jews is profoundly anti-multicultural. There is a huge difference between the honoring of differing traditions in a multicultural society and emphasizing traditional sectarian differences inherent in a multi-tribal society. No good will come from the antipathy which tribal Jews feel towards Gentiles. In fact, the strength of this antipathy is a good measure of Jewish tribalism. Jews who see anti-Semitism as a serious problem lurking everywhere can never relate to their Gentile neighbors as their fellows. And discussing these issues should be an intrinsic part of the Mondoweiss discussion about American support for Israel, not at all indicative of anti-Jewish hostility.

    • ROLAND NIKLES- "The challenge for non-Orthodox American Jews is to find a new center for their Jewish identity."

      Roland, do you realize what you have said? That the Judaic religion is an inadequate source of Jewish identity? That religion no longer unites the Jews, hence, Jews need a new source of tribal cohesion? That Zionism is no longer appropriate to function as the source of Jewish tribal identity, therefore, Jews need to find another source to ensure separation from the Gentiles and a continuation of beneficial nepotism? Multiculturalism for the Gentiles, tribal solidarity for the Jews? Yes, yes, how to obtain the benefits of tribal cohesion in a multicultural world without Zionism and the intrinsically anti-Gentile emphasis on anti-Semitism and the Holocaust. In a world coming apart at the end of an era, the main emphasis needs to be "Is it good for the Jews?" How is a Christian identity separate from the Christian religion? How is a Muslim identity separate from the Islamic religion? Why do Jews need a Jewish identity separate from the Judaic religion?

  • Note to Ken Livingstone: The British Labour party has supported Zionism much more than the Nazis ever did
    • NU'MAN ABD AL-WAHID- "These are facts Livingstone and his wing of the British Labour Party could do well to note if they are to avoid accusations of anti-Semitism...."

      Lord help us, Ken Livingstone can't try to defend Naz Shah against shameful and totally unjustified smears unless he condemns the history of British imperialism in Palestine? Otherwise, he can rightfully expect to be charged with anti-Semitism himself? Did the charges of anti-Semitism come from non-Zionist British imperialists? Or did they come from Zionist attack dogs? Pointing out Zionist hypocrisy may have been poor strategy, however, the de facto support for this type of smear by Nu'Man Abd al-Wahid suggests that he may well be part of this shameful orchestrated campaign of vilification. Real anti-Semitism in Britain is negligible (Zionist ravings notwithstanding), whereas the attack on Naz Shah is despicable and Jeremy Corbyn's apparent capitulation both shameful and an indication that he doesn't have what it takes to change the British political economy even slightly.

  • If it had been up to Hillary Clinton, there would be no Iran Deal
    • On a related topic, below I provide a link to President Obama's talk at the White House correspondents dinner. It is an amazing performance and indicates that Obama is an extremely talented and well qualified enemy of the 99%. I personally consider the Obama administration the absolute worst administration as far as the 99% are concerned, Bill Clinton was the second worst, George W. Bush the third worst. Not that George wouldn't have loved to be the number one champion of the 1%, but he simply lacked the talent. Obama is impressive. The entire performance lasts just over 30 minutes, however, even just 5 minutes will demonstrate his extraordinary talent. Witty and lovable, the perfect front man to sell empire's dirty business. Perhaps Bernie Sanders has a chance after all? Loathsome Hillary invites rebellion, but Bernie? What a perfect encore to hope and change! Who better to sell the imperial agenda? It could happen, it really could. First, check out the video. link to informationclearinghouse.info

  • Harvard biotechnology conference whitewashes Israeli occupation
    • Harvard lies at the very center of the imperial doctrinal system. Israel is a very important part of empire, not the least because American Jewish Zionists are well represented within the imperial system of legitimization and control, and sufficiently organized and disciplined so as to exert pressure beyond their numbers. As such, it is no more conceivable that Harvard would criticize Israel than it would seriously criticize empire. One recent example of Harvard perfidy is provided by the warm reception given a talk by Rwandan genocidaire Paul Kagame, a US ally and favorite of Rabbi Shmuley Boteach. A brief quote followed by a link to a must read article.

      "All of which is chilling background for Kagame’s speech at liberal Harvard and the warm response it received there. In a short and manifestly non-eloquent speech, the Rwandan butcher informed his top-of-the-Ivy League listeners that Rwanda defies the “chicken-and-egg argument about development versus democracy.” (Paul Street) link to counterpunch.org

  • Advice to British leftwingers on kicking racism out of their anti-Israel rhetoric
    • ANNIE- "“problems” — seriously keith — you get one trashed the other day and moan about it. if the nature of your offense isn’t clear to you why not just rephrase and try again."

      Are you kidding? If it was just that one yesterday, I wouldn't even have mentioned it, even though I can't see why it was rejected. After all, I am not Hophmi who expects to be privileged. This is a pattern of rejection that didn't used to exist. I had six comments in a row rejected on the Rachel Sandalow-Ash thread link to mondoweiss.net , and five more since, in spite of rewriting/phrasing several of the six. The last to get tossed on the Sandalow-Ash thread was me questioning why there were only a total of six comments that were approved. I have had similar experiences when commenting in defense of Greta Berlin where everything I said was trashed, so don't give me this "rephrase and try again" crap. You have previously said that you consider a re-submission an attempt to sneak something by and automatically reject it. Of course, it is your right to do so, but don't pretend that it isn't happening or that my rejected comments are somehow in violation of the guidelines. How many of Hophmi's comments are rejected? Hell, he complains if they are even slightly delayed in moderation. Once again, I am not challenging your right and obligation to moderate the comments and reject mine as required, but I emphatically object to your dishonest implication that this is a rare phenomenon and I simply a whiner. I place a high value on honesty and intellectual integrity and get upset with those who don't. Will this comment pass moderation?

    • MOOSER- "Instead of asking the Mods to become unpaid editors for “Hophmi”, why not take the attitude that the very worst thing the Mods can do to “Hophmi” is print his stuff as is?"

      Perhaps if I wasn't having moderation problems I would feel differently. Particularly since the nature of my offense isn't clear to me. I continue to cross invisible lines, apparently giving offense while Hophmi rampages recklessly and offensively with little or no consequences that I am aware of. Something happening here, what it is ain't exactly clear.

    • YONAH FREDMAN- "kastner was no hero. but he was no collaborator. to blame him for facilitating the murder of Hungarian Jews is just malarkey."

      Your ignorance is appalling. For cry sakes, get a copy of "Perfidy" by Ben Hecht and deal with reality rather than Zionist mythology.

    • HOHMI- "Yes, yes, the usual projective claptrap from an antisemite about he can’t stand himself. Next?"

      You just can't stop, can you, even if you wind up proving my point? Or are you making a demonstration of Jewish power to let me know that you can make scurrilous accusations without fear of reprisal or even moderation, even though you continue to violate Mondoweiss comment policy with surprising impunity. Ah, gilded victimhood, available only through birthright.

      HOPHMI- "...the religion of a particular person...."

      Religion? Jewish atheists aren't Jews? You bounce between religion and peoplehood as suits your propagandistic purpose. Does Israel define Jews based solely upon religion? Zionism is about Jewish peoplehood, as you are well aware and try to obfuscate so that you can conflate tribalism with religion.

      HOPHMI- "What’s a Jewish bias?"

      A tendency to view reality from a Jewish perspective, usually involving "Is it good for the Jews?", and nowadays support for Israel. From the Conference of Presidents of Major American Jewish Organizations website:

      "Every day, the Conference of Presidents Fund works publicly and behind the scenes addressing vital concerns with US and world leaders, key opinion molders and the public about Israel's security and vitality, threats posed by a nuclear Iran, global terrorism, anti-Semitism and the delegitimization campaign, making a critical difference at home and abroad. link to conferenceofpresidents.org

      And make no mistake, the so-called fight against anti-Semitism is but a pretext for the making of scurrilous accusations designed to intimidate in order to achieve political objectives, as is the case with this disgraceful attack on Naz Shah, Ken Livingstone and Jeremy Corbyn. A quote and a link to Norman Finkelstein who discusses this very issue.

      "But lo and behold, in the blink of an eye, right in the wake of the Pew poll showing that antisemitism in the UK is marginal, the hysteria has started up all over again. The reality is, there is probably more prejudice in the UK against fat people than there is prejudice against Jews." (Norman Finkelstein) link to normanfinkelstein.com

    • Norman Finkelstein has posted a response to this whole anti-Semitism brouhaha that stands as a useful counterpoint to this Robert Cohen article. I quote two paragraphs from this excellent article along with the link.

      "Compare the American scene. Our Corbyn is Bernie Sanders. In all the primaries in the US, Bernie has been sweeping the Arab and Muslim vote. It’s been a wondrous moment: the first Jewish presidential candidate in American history has forged a principled alliance with Arabs and Muslims. Meanwhile, what are the Blairite-Israel lobby creeps up to in the UK? They’re fanning the embers of hate and creating new discord between Jews and Muslims by going after Naz Shah, a Muslim woman who has attained public office. They’re making her pass through these rituals of public self-degradation, as she is forced to apologise once, twice, three times over for a tongue-in-cheek cartoon reposted from my website. And it’s not yet over! Because now they say she’s on a ‘journey’. Of course, what they mean is, ‘she’s on a journey of self-revelation, and epiphany, to understanding the inner antisemite at the core of her being’. But do you know on what journey she’s really on? She’s on a journey to becoming an antisemite. Because of these people; because they fill any sane, normal person with revulsion.
      ....
      In order to put an end to this, there has to be a decisive repudiation of this political blackmail. Bernie Sanders was brutally pressured to back down on his claim that Israel had used disproportionate force during its 2014 assault on Gaza. He wouldn’t budge, he wouldn’t retreat. He showed real backbone. Corbyn should take heart and inspiration from Bernie’s example. He has to say: no more reports, no more investigations, we’re not going there any more. The game is up. It’s long past time that these antisemitism-mongers crawled back into their sewer – but not before humbly apologising to Naz Shah, and begging her forgiveness."
      (Norman Finkelstein) link to normanfinkelstein.com

    • DAN CROWTHER- "Stop telling people how to talk."

      Ah but Dan, one of the prerogatives of power is being able to instruct the little people in the proper etiquette of discourse when discussing their betters so as not to offend and, perhaps, suffering the consequences of insubordination.

    • HOPHMI- "And sometimes it seems like anti-Zionism wouldn’t be anti-Zionism without complaining, as Mondoweiss does almost daily, about Jews controlling the media."

      Disproportionate Jewish presence and influence in the media is beyond dispute, to claim otherwise is to claim that empirical data is anti-Semitic. First a quote.

      "...they (Jews) make up one fourth or more of the writers, editors, and producers in America's "elite media," including network news divisions, the top newsweeklies and the four leading daily newspapers (New York Times, Los Angeles Times, Washington Post, and Wall Street Journal).

      ...In an October 1994 Vanity Fair feature profiling the kingpins of the new media elite, titled "The New Establishment," just under half of the two dozen entrepreneurs profiled were Jews. In the view of the magazine's editors, these are America's true power elite, "men and women from the entertainment, communications and computer industries whose ambitions and influence have made America the one true super-power of the information age."

      And in a few key sectors of the media, notably among Hollywood studio executives, Jews are so numerically dominant that calling these businesses Jewish-controlled is little more than a statistical observation." (p280, "Jewish Power," J.J. Goldberg)

      It is hardly an exaggeration to say that at the very least that this Jewish presence strongly suggests a Jewish bias, and very likely a pro-Israeli bias. Arguing that it doesn't, as you do, is akin to arguing that the overwhelmingly white media control doesn't reflect a white bias. Furthermore, we are not just talking ownership. Organized Jewish-Zionist power can very effectively pressure the media to avoid saying or doing things which will generate flack. To continue to deny the rather obvious reality is pure Zionist propaganda.

    • HOPHMI- "Antisemitism is endemic to the BDS movement."

      Spurious charges of anti-Semitism is endemic to the Zionist movement, as is anti-Gentilism. One way to tell who has the power and who doesn't is to observe who can make the most scurrilous accusations without fear of reprisal versus who must choose their words with care lest they suffer severe consequences.

  • Defending Israel, PEN says it can't support 'cultural boycotts of any kind' -- but it does!
    • Good Lord, why the pretense that PEN is actually an NGO? PEN is a US controlled GNGO (government non-government organization) and Suzanne Nossel is a Judeo-Zionist imperialist who favors imperial intervention. Why pretend otherwise, or that PEN's policies are merely hypocrisy rather than imperial realpolitik? Boycott Israel? Dream on.

  • Sy Hersh's 'forbidden statement': Sanders's liberation from NY Jewish money could change US foreign policy
    • HOPHMI- "Giving for the causes you believe in is not corruption...."

      Yes, and control of the political process by the corporations and oligarchs is democracy in action. There is no bottom to your barrel.

    • PHIL- "...Bernie Sanders’s method of raising money from individuals off the internet was disempowering rich Jews."

      Jeez, is there no straw so tiny and insignificant that you will not grab it, wave it around while jumping up and down declaring victory just around the corner? Phil, I hate to break it to you but this is capitalism, disempowering money is inconceivable. In the last 10 years, the rich have gotten a lot richer, and these rich Jews are more powerful than ever. Bernie's success was primarily a consequence of discontent among the 99%, which has been subverted by "the Bern." The Democratic party is the graveyard of progressive activism.

  • Beinart's Jewish double-bind: Support oppression or you're out of the family
  • Norman Finkelstein on Sanders, the first intifada, BDS, and ten years of unemployment
    • DANAA- "(I am using the Saker’s terminology here, so you know where i am going with this)"

      Indeed I do, and to a degree I agree. Unfortunately, my prognosis is that these efforts are too little too late. Russia has internal political problems (Atlanticists versus Nationalists) and the Chinese don't appear to have their heart into it. At least some Russians see the need to defeat the imperial project, yet Russia lacks the ability to do so. China may have the ability to collapse the global economy ending empire, yet seems more concerned with increasing their influence within empire rather than destroying it. The New Silk Road is a pipe dream which will never be completed and which probably shouldn't be. The problem with these ex-communist countries is that they take both Marx and Western economists seriously, hence, don't really understand capitalism or empire. As long as these countries are trade dependent, they will continue to be hostage to the global financial system and under threat of destabilization by the US controlled internet and social media which make possible color revolutions and hybrid war. We are at the end of an era and things are coming to a head. The future looks bleak, silver linings increasingly rare and valuable. Silver lining? Has there ever been a better time for gallows humor? And, of course, being one-half of the Cassandra Duo is always a pleasure.

    • DANAA- "AS a result, he still thinks in rational terms about a group of people who some time ago have been brain-washed into more of a cult-like mentality."

      Spot on! This is a characteristic he shares with Noam Chomsky in which they assume that the bulk of humanity is more or less rational like them. As a consequence, they can do a superb job of analyzing a situation, yet, when it comes to what to do about a problem, they propose a solution that would work splendidly for rational folks like them. The harsh reality is that the bulk of humanity is frequently irrational, more likely to exhibit solidarity to irrational group ideology than to be swayed by empirical data. This group solidarity is considered a requirement of group membership which, in turn, is considered more important to individual well-being than pure rationality. I refer to this phenomenon as the logic of irrationality. We all take much of what we believe "on faith" in order to fit in. And the more extreme the ideology, the more irrational the true believers become, particularly when they have been led to believe that the group is under threat.

    • STEPHEN SHENFIELD- "Keith: We (humanity) are caught between two proven evils — corporate globalization and the system of rival states."

      You appear to be confusing organizational structure with the underlying cause of the problem, namely, the concentration of power which, in advanced capitalism, usually takes the form of concentrated money-power. Not all nation-states are warmongers and one can envision a nation at least somewhat responsive to the will of the citizenry and to the protection of civil rights and liberties. On the other hand, corporate globalization represents the ultimate concentration of power, a matrix of control utilizing both hard and soft power (Hillary's smart power) to render escape from imperial domination virtually impossible. The heart and soul of the system is the global financial system which ties together the various national interdependencies such that the various nation states lack the means of survival outside the system. This is one reason the Egyptian Arab Spring was doomed from the start. Since Egypt needed an IMF loan to buy food on the global market, its options were very limited right from the get-go. Furthermore, a collapse of the global financial system would cause massive social disruption which, in fact, it was designed to do to preclude attempts at breakaway. And no, Stephen, we don't need a world state. Rather, we need to emphasize local autonomy and local survivability in order to put an end to the ongoing global conflict over the control of resources. A critical element to all of this is to restructure the private global financial system of debt money which is the driving force behind much of what is happening.

    • DONALD- "Not disagreeing with what you said here– I just don’t think Finkelstein would disagree either."

      Just because Finkelstein is a friend of Chomsky doesn't mean that they are ideological soul mates. Finkelstein is an unrepentant Marxist, whereas, Chomsky never was one. But Finkelstein is honest, hence, I take him at his words which I have quoted. As such, I would be astonished if he would agree with what I have said. He has focussed his entire life and career on Israel/Palestine, global political economy unexamined, his youthful Marxism exerting a continuing pull (an alternate form of secular Judaism?). Hey, I like both Norman and Noam, and have acquired a lot of their books (particularly Noam). But they are scholars which I utilize, not gurus I follow.

    • INTEMPORATE- "As always, Chomsky’s the Augustinian anarchist.."

      From your link: "Chomsky’s reason for the “not yet” is that a powerful central government is currently necessary as a bulwark against the power of the corporate elite; thus it will not be safe to abolish or even scale back the state until we first use the state to break the power of the corporate elite:" link to c4ss.org

      Chomsky's decision to vote for Clinton has nothing to do with anarchism, rather, it involves the ludicrous lesser of two evils logical fallacy. Voting for one of the corporate candidates essentially legitimizes imperial policies insofar as the people will have voted for a candidate who will obviously pursue imperial policies. As for anarchism deferred, Chomsky's error is not that he correctly sees that anarchism is currently unworkable, but rather that he has deluded himself that anarchism will ever be workable or desirable. Complex, interdependent societies such as ours need to be organized to function, else they disintegrate. Anarchism is so out of touch with historical and current political economy that there are no functioning examples of this type of social organization, except perhaps small communes. It exists only as an ideological fantasy in the minds of its cult-like followers.

    • NORMAN FINKELSTEIN- "If I had my way, I would abolish all states."

      So would the corporations who are working in that direction. Thanks to all of these "trade" agreements, national sovereignty is a thing of the past, at least for the global financial system and other instruments of soft power. Norman, why are you clinging to the rotted cadaver of Marxism rather than trying to understand contemporary political economy?

      NORMAN FINKELSTEIN- "At this point in time, states are totally irrational."

      Wrong! At this point in time, for better or worse, states are our only protection against total corporate/financial control. The emphasis needs to be on local autonomy. It is essential for nations to break free from the neoliberal matrix of control. Globalization could very well be the death knell for humanity.

      NORMAN FINKELSTEIN- "All the major challenges currently confronting humanity—climate change, economic inequality and dysfunction—can only be solved on a global level."

      Yes, but not by those in charge of the global empire. Any solution inevitably requires significant local autonomy to break free of global financial control. How many of the problems you mentioned are the consequence of transnational corporate actions? Will eliminating nations and their political system work to reign in these corporations, or to empower corporate rule? Do you want the IMF and a tribunal of corporate lawyers to decide these issues? That is where we are headed. A major problem with you Marxists is that you have a centralized, bureaucratic mindset, therefore, incapable of understanding contemporary political economy. We are at the end of an era and indications are that we are headed to a form of neofeudal corporate control. You prefer corporate control to state control? Be careful what you wish for!

  • Donna Edwards's campaign unsettles the Israel lobby inside the Democratic Party
    • ATLANTAICONOCLAST- "crony capitalism"

      No, the problem is systemic to the entire global financial system which, in fact, more or less controls the entire global political economy which, in turn, is effectively mortgaged to the banks and bond holders. Thanks to technological changes, our political economy is radically different than it was even 50 years ago. Two quotes and links which pertain.

      "So under U.S. pressure, the international banking system was set up to facilitate the money laundering of drug capital. The reason the Americans and the Canadians were not particularly noteworthy in the law firm’s records is the Panamanian law firm’s records was that its role was to set up money laundering for foreigners, to conceal their means of getting money. But the oil industry doesn’t conceal it. The oil industry declares all of the income it gets, and the mining industry declares all the income that it gets from the Panamanian shipping companies, from the Liberian shipping companies. But because Panama and Liberia don’t have an income tax, there’s no tax liability for this. It’s stolen fair and square from the tax collector, just like California Senator Hayakawa said America had stolen Panama fair and square from Colombia." (Michael Hudson) link to counterpunch.org

      "The situation we are currently facing is that the real economy, now mostly monetized, has reached the limits of growth. This means that that the real economy and market expansion can no longer underpin the creation of exponentially increasing amounts of credit money to satisfy the obligation to repay outstanding loans plus compounding interest payments. The private financiers have monetized the planet and are sucking it dry. With a financial system using sovereign money, public banking, and progressive taxation on income and assets, this problem wouldn’t exist. However, our private banking system and debt money were never intended to serve the public good, rather, it was a means to concentrate wealth and power into a relatively few private hands and the corporations they control. Now, it is virtually inconceivable that the capitalist financiers will voluntarily change the system in a socially constructive manner, having devoted their lives to immiserating most of the world’s population for profit and power." (Keith) link to saskck.blogspot.com

    • JOWMOWREY- "No one wants to acknowledge that Sanders’ overall foreign policy will likely be very similar to the status quo, no matter what his rhetoric on Palestine."

      Perhaps we should remind ourselves that regardless which major party candidate wins the electoral marketing extravaganza, imperial policy, both foreign and domestic, is set by the imperial elites, the President primarily a spokesman to sell the elite agenda. The primary difference between the candidates is which segment of the elites has more clout. This is capitalism, folks. The economic/financial system dominates the political system which functions primarily to manage society consistent with elite goals and objectives. In the long run, money overwhelms all opposition. Capitalism's truly distinctive feature is the monetization of power.

  • Another interview on Israeli TV
    • MOOSER- "Those replies to Ms. Rothchild’s Facebook page still have the power to shock and dismay."

      Indeed they do. However, they also provide a window into the hearts and totalitarian minds of those we are facing. This is the face of Judeo-Zionist fundamentalism on full display. And Alice Rothchild is hardly the first. Both Israel Shahak and Noam Chomsky have faced as bad or worse.

  • The end of apartheid in Israel will not destroy the country, it can only improve it
    • ANTIDOTE- "Does it make sense to advocate post Apartheid SA as a positive model for Israel...."

      The short answer is no. Rather, South Africa serves as a cautionary tale to emphasize that nowadays the political system is subservient to the economic system. If Israeli's were rational, they would embrace the South African model in a heart beat, however, they do not because they are constrained by the Judeo-Zionist ideology involving the "redemption" of the land, an ancient/medieval tribal theology which takes precedence over rationality, and will not countenance returning even one inch of the "sacred soil", nor accepting Goyim in the Holy Land on a permanent basis.

      What to do? Stop the worst abuses and fight for the maximum civil rights. Concentrate on short term victories rather than endless debate over some ultimate solution decades from now.

    • SIBIRIAK- "SA’s problems aren’t the result of the demise of political Apartheid; they are the result, for the most part, of an imposed neoliberal economic regime that has maintained, if not worsened, a structure of gross economic and social inequality."

      I mostly agree, however, it can be argued that Black faces in the SA government served to dampen resistance to neoliberalism, hence, to facilitate implementation of neoliberalism, just as Obama serves to dampen dissent in the US among Blacks and other minorities due to his race and his image as a "liberal" Democrat. Likewise, "empowering" the PA to maintain law and order in the Palestinian areas of the West Bank serves to facilitate Israeli control over the entire West Bank.

  • PEN director acknowledges 'legitimate concerns' about Israel sponsorship but won't give back the money
    • NEVADA NED- "Back in 2013, peace activist John Walsh had an excellent article about Nossel and PEN."

      Most of these human rights NGOs have always been analogous to missionaries for capitalist imperialism, doing some good at the micro level while simultaneously supporting the framework of Western imperialism at the macro level. Lately, however, they have gotten worse. Perhaps at least somewhat inevitable with the increased concentration of wealth upward to those who fund and benefit from NGO policies and propaganda. Virtually all of the big human rights, environmental and feminist NGOs have been more or less co-opted. Your link is to a good article which also links to a book by John Peck called "Ideal Illusions: How the U.S. Government Co-opted Human Rights." I ordered the book because the author wrote "Washington's China," an insightful analysis of US self-serving projections onto China's actions. Others may consider doing likewise.

    • Curious that Mondoweiss would provide so little detail on this former Amnesty International USA Director who touted her Jewish values even as she supported the US in Afghanistan, the Gaza slaughter, and the Pussy Riot provocateurs. She is a member of the US elite birthright nomenklatura. Her position at both Amnesty and PEN indicates the extent to which many (most?) high profile NGOs are, in fact, closely linked to the US government and ruling elites. Yet another example of the massive influence of American Jewish Zionists within the corridors of power. I am providing a link to the Amnesty article on Mondoweiss. link to mondoweiss.net

  • Obama's November surprise
    • OLDGEEZER- "Yeah. I hear ya. Whatever."

      Why "whatever?" I think that there are a lot of folks who don't appreciate Harvard's role as an imperial indoctrination center, including its use to provide credentials to imperial mass murders. A quote from Noam Chomsky excerpted from his book "Year 501: The Conquest Continues." A book, I might add, which should be required reading in high school.

      "One of the grandest of the Guatemalan killers, General Hector Gramajo, was rewarded for his contributions to genocide in the highlands with a fellowship to Harvard’s John F. Kennedy School of Government-) not unreasonably, given Kennedy’s decisive contributions to the vocation of counterinsurgency (one of the technical terms for international terrorism conducted by the powerful). Cambridge dons will be relieved to learn that Harvard is no longer a dangerous center of subversion.

      While earning his degree at Harvard, Gramajo gave an interview to the Harvard International Review in which he offered a more nuanced view of his own role. He took personal credit for the "70 percent-30 percent civil affairs program, used by the Guatemalan government during the 1980s to control people or organizations who disagreed with the government," outlining the doctrinal innovations he had introduced: "We have created a more humanitarian, less costly strategy, to be more compatible with the democratic system. We instituted civil affairs [in 1982] which provides development for 70 percent of the population, while we kill 30 percent. Before, the strategy was to kill 100 percent." This is a "more sophisticated means” than the previous crude assumption that you must "kill everyone to complete the job" of controlling dissent, he explained. (Noam Chomsky) link to chomsky.info

    • OLDGEEZER- "Facetiousness aside it somewhat stands to reason that a lot of the best lawyers will have come from the best schools."

      Best schools? I would suggest that the quality of an Ivy league education may be exaggerated, whereas the effectiveness of an Ivy League indoctrination is well established. The Ivy League is primarily a boot camp for the children of the elite, its elite status confirmed by acceptance into the power elite. I think it obvious that Harvard trained lawyers identify with the elites of which they are a part and have a very narrow perspective along with a commitment to defend the system which rewards them so well. Did I mention that Merrick Garland used to work on Wall Street? Yet another real man of the people.

    • OLD GEEZER- "While some prior appointments are questionable this one isn’t. At least on tbe surface."

      One thing which I find very troubling is that, if approved, then all 9 Supremes will have come from an Ivy League background, primarily Harvard and Yale. Do we really need yet another ex-Wall Street lawyer to reinforce an elite, Wall Street friendly perspective on Constitutional interpretations?

  • 'Say Hello to Zenobia': A report from Palmyra rising from the ashes
    • ECHINOCOCCUS- "Counterpunch and Mondoweiss seem to be copying each other in this. Louis is CP’s Hophmi."

      Now if Mondoweiss would restrict Hophmi to film criticism then, perhaps, Hophmi would be Mondoweiss' Louis Proyect? Lord knows, there are more than enough new Holocaust movies to keep Hophmi busy fixating on anti-Semitism and Jew-hatred (his favorite topics).

    • LPROYECT- "I take it that you believe in the efficacy of dropping barrel bombs on open-air markets...."

      Well, if it isn't the rancid Marxist for empire come pay us another visit to advocate for a humanitarian destabilization campaign. Standing shoulder to shoulder with US/Israel, NATO, Turkey, Saudi Arabia, and the GCC in support of those "moderate" Islamic fundamentalists. Doesn't it bother you to be so out of sync with the rest of the CounterPunch contributors?

    • AUSTIN BRANION- "...found myself visiting less and less as the Assad apologists started getting published and....so many people here so willingly employ the same hasbara techniques in defense, or moral obfuscation, of the Syrian regime...."

      So, Assad must go? Gee, where have we heard that before? From the human rights activists in Saudi Arabia, Turkey, the GCC, Israel and US/NATO? This has been an extraordinarily bloody imperial intervention, long in the planning, and has nothing to do with human rights. When has the empire ever been concerned about human rights except as a pretext? But joining in the demonization of the target of an imperial destabilization may prove rewarding for you. Who knows? Anyone who is really concerned with human rights is painfully aware that the Middle East is a mess precisely because of imperial interventions. And when highlighting the consequences of ISIS/Daesh terror is equated with pro-Assad hasbara, we know exactly where you stand. Another liberal interventionist for empire. Shameful. By the way, you are aware, I hope, that ISIS/Daesh is a creation of empire, the current iteration of the Mujahideen employed in Afghanistan? Al Qaeda in Iraq re-branded? Terrorists in tanks supplied by US/NATO/Turkey, et al, who would fall apart without massive imperial support? This is what you are supporting? Syria turned into Libya, or worse?

    • STANLEYHELLER- "The “rebels” are mainly 1,000 different local militias without any ideology, just trying to save themselves from mass rape, torture and murder from Assad, from ISIS."

      Oh, Lord, yet another liberal interventionist come pay us a visit. It takes a certain amount of chutzpah to defend an imperial destabilization campaign as a peasant uprising. In case you haven't noticed, Stanley, the empire is on a rampage smashing any and all countries that dare to resist imperial control. The carnage in Syria is a consequence of a US (and cohorts) initiated hybrid war against Syria, the primary purpose was simply to destroy Syria. They have succeeded, just as they succeeded in Libya and elsewhere. There are no moderate rebels, only well paid Islamist mercenaries. And the plans to destabilize Syria go back a long way (see Wesley Clark, et al). And this remaking of the map of the Middle East is part of the overall scheme to eliminate any potential rivals to the American led empire during a window of opportunity prior to the restructuring of the global political economy into a form of neofeudalism, the end game of neoliberal globalization.

  • 'Forward' columnist and Emily's List leader relate 'gigantic,' 'shocking' role of Jewish Democratic donors
    • GAMAL- "understanding is vastly overrated."

      Hear, hear! Once I learned to renounce my fetishization of reality and to embrace my Karma and laxatives, things cleared up.

      PS- Jackie Mittoo?

    • MOOSER- "“Keith” isn’t it obvious?"

      Yes. But what is actually strange is how many Zionists spend an inordinate amount of time at these (Mossad run?) "anti-Semitic" websites while I hang at CounterPunch, Znet, Black Agenda Report,The Saker,etc, yet I am the anti-Semite. Before Mondoweiss, I had never heard of most of these. Stormfront? Does that involve weatherizing your house? Seriously, these are totally marginal sites that Zionists fixate on and try to conflate someone with as proof by labeling. And since these sites do a lot of copy and paste of legitimate authors, then someone like Hophmi can claim something is anti-Semitic if it appears on one of these sites which Hophmi is intimately familiar with. Talk about a get out of jail free card, just make sure that something you don't like is copy and pasted by rense.com and you are home free. If you can't hide it, taint it by association. So very, very dishonest.

    • YONAH FREDMAN- "Watched some David duke on YouTube the other day."

      Why?

    • HOPHMI- "His critiques actually are in that modern mode of taking the presence of Jews in general society and the power they possess as individuals, and creating a myth that they exercise it collective, as Jews, for the benefit of Jews...."

      Whoa, partner. Are you actually claiming that organized Jewry doesn't act as a collective to advance the interests of (primarily Zionist) Jews and doesn't seek to collectively influence the US government regarding Israel? Because that is exactly what Phil has been writing about even as you function as a Zionist attack dog to hide this reality. The very notion that AIPAC, the World Jewish Congress, and the other members of the Conference of Presidents of the Major American Jewish Organizations don't function collectively to bring Jewish financial and political power to bear is preposterous. Social clubs? They are just social clubs?

      HOPHMI- "I’ve never heard anyone ever suggest that it was antisemitic to discuss power in the Jewish community."

      What chutzpah! You did exactly that at the beginning of your comment! You do it all the time, conflating any such discussion as being like the Protocols or Father Coughlin, both of which you did numerous times before this thread. And if J.J. Goldberg referenced Father Coughlin, then he also is guilty of conflation and of unsubstantiated labeling. And since the conference dealt with the massive amount of Jewish political funding and how that influenced the politicians, it supported the rather obvious observation that organized Jewry clearly functions as a power-seeking, power-wielding collective to achieve their objectives. And anyone who points that out will be called an anti-Semite, which, I might add, Yonah equates to a Jew-hater.

      HOPHMI- "It’s like talking about crime in the Black community without discussing institutional racism."

      Comparing the unhappy plight of the American Blacks with the long history of American Jewish power and privilege is obscene.

      HOPHMI- "When a political movement uses Jews who are harshly critical of their own faith, like Israel Shahak, to talk about what Judaism is, I think mentioning Pablo Christiani, and the use of such Jews by hegemons throughout history to justify persecuting the Jewish community, are relevant."

      Israel Shahak, your moral and intellectual superior, wrote about the influence of Classical Judaism on the policies of the state of Israel where he resided, an extremely relevant topic for this website. I am unaware of how Pablo Christiani is relevant to Israeli policies, you use him merely to disingenuously conflated someone to him. For example, "Pablo Christiani speaks," referring to Yoni Falic. You are utterly shameless.

      HOPHMI- "Unfortunately, history has taught us to be vigilant."

      What contemporary events show is that Shahak was essentially correct that Zionism is a form of reversion to Classical Judaism with its strong anti-Gentile animus, particularly virulent concerning the Gentile peasants who were, in fact, the majority of the Gentile population. Your sense of victimhood correlates strongly with the rise of the Holocaust industry following the 1967 Six Day War. You are a loyal and aggressive defender of the Zionist faith, an attack dog for Zion.

    • HOPHMI- "I wonder if Keith has ever referred to the United States arsenal of close to 5,000 nuclear warheads as “gas chambers in waiting.” Or Russia’s. Or India’s. Or Pakistan’s. Or France’s. Or Great Britain’s. Or China’s."

      The world should have gotten rid of nuclear weapons long ago, and better do it soon or the species will likely annihilate itself. The biggest obstacle to the elimination of nuclear weapons is the US, which considers nukes a strategic asset. Israel, like its patron, has an aggressive stance on nukes, Moshe Dayan wanted to use them in 1973. Both the US and Israel are adamantly opposed to a nuclear weapons free Middle East (which Iran supports). So yes, all nuclear weapons are effectively gas chambers in waiting, and you should be much more concerned with Obama's planned $ 1 trillion nuclear upgrade than with trying to label me an anti-Semite.

      As for the rest of your comment, the number of Palestinians killed and displaced during the Nakba, exceeds the number of Jews killed or displaced by Nazi Germany prior to WW II. And the number of Arabs killed as the Middle East warmonger Israel invades Lebanon, and Palestinians in Gaza when Israel "mows the lawn" greatly exceed the number of Jews killed prior to World War II. Don't forget that it was the Zionists who dealt with the Nazis and approved of the laws restricting Jewish contact with Gentiles. And it is yet another example of Zionist dishonesty to label as Holocaust denial pointing out that along with the Six Million Jewish victims of the Shoah, over 20 million Soviets died stopping Nazi Germany. For Jewish Zionists, World War II consisted mostly of the Holocaust.

    • EVA SMAGACZ- "Nobody argues that Israel IS currently killing Palestinians at the rate of 100000 a month – this is your deflection from the argument."

      Well, of course it is a deflection. Had James restricted his reference to Nazi Germany in the 1930s, it would be quite accurate. Additionally, it must be remembered that the Holocaust occurred during wartime, which provided Nazi Germany with an environment conducive to such massive killing (and don't forget that the Soviet Union lost well over 20 million of its citizens fighting Nazi Germany). It should also be pointed out that Israel has several hundred nuclear weapons which they may use during a war which would result in an Arab death toll many times that of the Six Million. Think of these nukes as instant gas chambers not yet used but standing in waiting for the Samson Option final solution. And it is US/Israel which block a nuclear free Middle East as advocated by the UN and supported by Iran. Tells a tale, doesn't it?

    • EVA SMAGACZ- "I would be so grateful for a definition of Anti-semitism...."

      The traditional definition generally follows the line that anti-Semitism is the irrational hatred of Jews just because they are Jews. The current operational definition of anti-Semitism is any activity which interferes with the agenda of Zionist Jews. The operational definition is used to apply the label which is then used to infer Jew hatred. It is a tactic used to justify Israeli actions (safe haven from anti-Semitism, etc), and of intimidation to squelch any discussion of Jewish power and the political economy. The Protocols of the Elders of Zion are frequently referenced along with Blood Libels and lately Pablo Christiani and Father Coughlin. Also, if you link to rense.com your quote will be tainted even though Google led you there and you will be inferred an anti-Semite. I find it curious that these Zionists seem to have such an intimate knowledge of these "anti-Semitic" websites, apparently they spend a lot of time there. Not surprising, perhaps, because perceived anti-Semitism is the mother's milk of Zionism.

    • HOPHMI- "What mud?"

      Conflating things you disagree with to Pablo Christiani (11), the Protocols (25), Father Coughlin (20) and blood libel (14). There may be more instances, but that is what a quick search of your commenter profile yields. The pretense that this was a special situation with compelling circumstances is a joke. And as for Yoni Falic, Hophmi, you were the one who originally brought up Christiani, dishonestly conflating Yoni to him. You are a shameless liar who, for whatever reason, is commenting much more than in the past. You are a plague upon this comments section, too many people spending too much time dealing with your BS. As for empirical data, I have yet to see you back up anything you say. It is just you mouthing off.

    • HOPHMI- "I think that readers here think the Protocols of the Elders of Zion is a work of non-fiction and that they’re primed to believe any conspiracy theory someone spins about the American Jewish community."

      Have you ever read the Protocols? I have. It is easily the dullest, most repetitious thing I have ever read, containing virtually no useful information. I forced myself to keep reading because of the continued reference to "the Protocols." I needed to confirm that, in spite of a worthless beginning, there wasn't anything interesting toward the end. The current primary function of the Protocols is as a perjorative label used by Zionist propagandists such as you to avoid any empirical evaluation, relying instead on proof by labeling. Pablo Christiani, blood libel, Protocols, Father Coughlin, conspiracy theory, etc. You throwing mud doesn't alter the empirical reality.

  • We Stand with Palestine in the Spirit of 'Sumud': Statement from the U.S. prisoner, labor and academic solidarity delegation to Palestine
    • MHUGHES 976- "...it is genuinely a light unto the nations."

      You misspelled "blight." Interesting how a retired member of the doctrinal system can see the good in our global empire. Obviously, you lack first hand experience as a Third World beneficiary of neoliberal globalization. Fear not, chickens are coming home to roost.

  • 'Anti-Zionism = anti-semitism' is a formal logical fallacy
    • SIBIRIAK- "All those elements of the alleged “blood libel” are substantial assertions subject to empirical verification."

      Yes, but when have you ever seen a Zionist such as Hophmi actually evaluate empirical data? The tried and true technique is to attach a perjorative label (blood libel, Protocols, Pablo Christiani, etc) and dismiss empirical reality out of hand while simultaneously accusing the truth teller of anti-Semitism. This proof by labeling is a very common tactic.

    • HOPHMI- "We have no reason to believe that a guy who prevailed about Louis IX to compel Jews to wear badges singling them out as Jews, prevailed on the Pope to order all copies of the Talmud burned, and used the power of King James 1 and Raymond de Penyafort to force Jewish communities to listen to his speeches and to pay the expenses for his travel hated Jews per se."

      And to you, it was all just like yesterday. The only history you know is the biased Judeo-centric "history" of Jews and Jew-haters. That is all you know and all you want to know. No tribalism here, folks!

    • HOPHMI- "Start learning not to blame others for your problems, Keith...."

      Start learning to take responsibility for Zionist actions and the world would be a better place. To deny Israeli and AIPAC influence in getting the US to invade Iraq is so intellectually dishonest (your specialty) as to be beyond hypocrisy. Are you still hot for the US to bomb Iran, you war monger? And if AIPAC and the rest of you Zionists got the US to attack Iran, would you later claim blamelessness? You are some piece of work, Hophmi, a Zionist cadre to the core.

    • HOPHMI- "The first is that fighting for human rights in Iraq is a far, far more urgent matter than Israel is."

      Typical Zionist misrepresentation of reality. The "human rights" situation in Iraq is a disaster precisely because of the imperial invasion and occupation of Iraq strongly supported by AIPAC and Israel. Your hands are double dirty on this one. Saudi Arabia? Imperial asset and Israeli de facto ally Saudi Arabia? Israel loves Saudi Arabia and the whole GCC.

  • Democratic debate: Is Netanyahu welcome at White House on Day 1 or an arrogant, deceptive asshole?
    • MOOSER- "You might very well be accused of antisemitism for it!"

      Oh hell, I will be accused of that no matter what I say. When I began commenting six years ago, I had never in the previous 66 years been accused of anti-Semitism. Never. Then came Mondoweiss and the East Coast Zionists (and anti-Zionists for that matter) with their strong tribal identity and take-no-prisoners style of confrontational discourse where truth is what works, successful lies a point of pride. Boy, did I get a rude awakening! Remember Bruce? Nowadays, it seems that the more lucid and probing my analysis of political economy vis-a-vis Zionism, tribalism and Judeo-Zionist myth-history, the more hysterical the reaction. Perhaps not all that surprising since I am seen as a threat to the Zionist quasi-religious ideology and it's tribalist base of support. As for Hophmi, I will be banned long before he is. He performs a function here (what it is ain't exactly clear). And I continue to have moderation difficulties even though the comments are in full compliance with policy. Alas, they may be in conflict with the Mondo meme, also not very clear. And the beat goes on....

    • HOPHMI- "Then he complains about personal attacks in the Mondoweiss comment section, LOL."

      LOL? Lies on lies? On the other hand, to be singled out by Hophmi, Yonah Fredman, and Tokyobk, three anti-Gentile colleagues, indicates that I must be doing something right.

    • HOPHMI- "What a joke this guy is."

      When have you ever quoted anything I said to substantiate any of your outrageous misrepresentations? Are you allergic to empirical data? Yet, the fact that you are in continual violation of the comments policy regarding personal attacks (and what else do you do?) with no consequences indicates that you have at least de facto support for your diatribes. The return of Bruce Wolman? And will this comment even pass moderation?

    • HOPHMI- "You simply blame the Jews for advocating multiculturalism for their own purposes...."

      The Jewish Zionist organizations not "the Jews." Another lie from Hophmi. Jews didn't benefit from multiculturalism? Why not multiculturalism for Israel instead of a Jewish state?

      HOPHMI- "...call them fifth-column tribalists who are unpatriotic...."

      Another totally unsubstantiated lie.

      HOPHMI- "...claim that historical persecution of Jews in Europe is a myth...."

      Another lie.

      HOPHMI- "...shriek on about how Ukrainian and Poles are being ignored if anyone dares to speak about the Shoah...."

      Quotes, please. All you talk about is the Holocaust and the mass murder of Jews as the "culmination" of centuries of anti-Semitism, a ludicrous Zionist ideological construct, part of the victimhood ideology which you continually surround yourself with. Gilded victimhood.

      HOPHMI- "...like white supremacists...."

      Yet another smear and particularly ludicrous insofar as I continue to support affirmative action while you oppose "reverse discrimination" because like former ADL head Nathan Perlmutter you find affirmative action "corrosive of Jewish interests."

      You have reached the point where virtually all of your comments are in violation of the comments policy regarding personal attacks, in your case resorting to insults, accusations and flat out lies. As such, you continually impede the discussion. The question is, WHY IS HOPHMI STILL ALLOWED TO COMMENT HERE?

    • MOOSER- "To start with, there is a unique anatomical trait among Jewish males. No other males are born like that."

      Am I missing something here? As far as I know, there is no unique anatomical trait among Jewish males. Jewishness is a birthright choice, not a genetic distinction.

    • YONAH FREDMAN- "Hophmi- bravo on your critique of Keith the hater of the jews."

      You crossed the line on that one partner. Demonstrate that I am a "hater of the Jews." I hate Phil Weiss? I hate Noam Chomsky? I hate Norman Finkelstein? I hate John Pilger? The hater is you, Yonah. You hate anything or anyone who criticizes Jewish tribalism. And I am opposed to tribalism and in favor of multiculturalism. True multiculturalism. But you are a tribalist to the core, which I could have lived with prior to this example of Jewish Zionist Gentile hatred. You wish to make common cause with that anti-Gentile bigot Hophmi? Have at it. Just remember that you will be judged by the friends you keep.

    • YONAH FREDMAN- "Keith-sweetheart."

      Please Yonah, I'm blushing.

      YONAH FREDMAN- "Survival is the Jewish trait you can’t tolerate. Group survival and group identity."

      "Can't tolerate" is a bit strong, don't you think? You have, however, made it quite clear that for you the essential Jewish trait is Jewish collective solidarity. Individual Jews are not real Jews, only those who are loyal members of the Jewish tribal community. Careful, Yonah, Hophmi claims that Jewish tribal solidarity doesn't exist, merely a creation of my anti-Semitic imagination.

    • HOPHMI- "We didn’t take stances on religious liberty, church-state separation, civil rights because we wanted a better society. We don’t continue to vote overwhelming Democratic because we favor civil liberties. No. It’s all about us."

      The things you have mentioned contributed to a multicultural society which is a good thing, something which I support. It has enabled many Jews to assimilate into the larger society without having to abandon their religion, and also to maintain a sense of Jewish identity while still becoming secular. Truly assimilated Jews are not tribal at all, their Jewish identity but a part of the whole fabric of a unified society. Then there are the Zionists like you who empathize more with the Jews of Israel than with your non-Jewish neighbors. Assuming, of course, that you have any non-Jewish neighbors.

      HOPHMI- "Right, it’s always us vs them with those damn Jews."

      Putting words in my mouth yet again? Yet another example of your extreme intellectual dishonesty. As for an example of anti-Gentilism, I encourage my fellow Mondoweissers to peruse your comment file and experience why I maintain that anti-Gentilism is inherent in Zionism.

      HOPHMI- "Ah yes, The International Jew."

      Yet another dishonest conflation of me, this time to Henry Ford. Curious, you then express concern over French and other Jews, yet no concern over the French in general or any of your fellow humans, such as the Palestinians. You are Judeo-centric, a tribalist primarily concerned with Jewish solidarity everywhere, unconcerned or hostile to non-Jews, particularly those which run afoul of your Zionist agenda.

      HOPHMI- "...the CATHOLIC CHURCH. Do they wield any power?"

      Of course they do, however, I am unaware that they have a significant impact on US Middle East foreign policy. Have the US Presidential candidates called on the Pope to kiss his ring and pledge fealty to the security of the Holy See?

      HOPHMI- "WHY IS THIS GUY STILL HERE?"

      Because my comments hopefully contribute to the discussion on important issues and don't violate the comments policy. You, however, are in continual flagrant violation of these policies. You are here primarily because then Mondoweiss can demonstrate that they encourage Zionist input no matter how obnoxious the commenter. To show that I have no hard feelings over your diatribe, I provide a reminder that the correct spellings are Benjamin Ginsberg (not Ginsburg) and Albert Shanker (not Shankar). Shanker was a real challenge for you, you misspelled it again and again even though the correct spelling was right in front of you, and even though you copied and pasted a comment of mine where I finally, graciously corrected your spelling. Do you have a problem admitting mistakes?

    • HOPHMI- "Again and again you think criticizing the history of European antisemitism is akin to labeling all Gentile as murderous Jewhaters...."

      What are you talking about? Trying to divert the comments, are you? I am clearly referring to you calling me an anti-Semite, a bigot and a white supremacist over the course of a couple of threads. You dishonestly try to conflate my Ginsberg quote with rense.com, a website which you are much more at home with than me. If I talk about current financial reality I am compared to the Nazis: "....one step removed from Nazi-Holocaust-was-really-about-Jews-and-finance bullshit." And how many times have you referenced the Protocols of the Elders of Zion? You make no contribution to the discussion whatever. Instead, you rely upon insults and accusations to try to derail or shut down a discussion which somehow potentially interferes with your Zionist agenda. And yes, you Zionists continually refer to non-Jews as both past and future anti-Semites. The Holocaust is your true religion.

      HOPHMI- "And as usual, you selectively quote in order to support your bigotry."

      Another insult and a way to backhandedly admit that you have nothing to support your positions, relying instead on denigrating your betters. Selectively quote? Feel free to demonstrate that I have in any way misrepresented any of these fine scholars.

      HOPHMI- "Please tell me which major Jewish organizations complained about “reverse discrimination.”

      NORMAN FINKELSTEIN- "Thus ADL head Nathan Perlmutter maintained that the "real anti-Semitism" in America consisted of policy initiatives "corrosive of Jewish interests," such as affirmative action...." (p37, "The Holocaust Industry," Norman Finkelstein)

      THE SHENGOLD JEWISH ENCYCLOPEDIA- "Today, still dedicated to a system of merit, ADL opposes reverse descrimination inherent in the use of racial quotas as the criteria for access to employment and education." link to books.google.com

      J.J. GOLDBERG- "Like everything else in black-Jewish relations, pinpointing the moment when the alliance began to unravel depends on where you stand….’My belief is that it really began with the Bakke case in 1978,’ says former NAACP national chair William Gibson.”

      “The case involved Allan Bakke, a white Christian from Minnesota who was rejected by the medical school at the University of California at Davis in 1974. Bakke sued, charging that the school had admitted less qualified applicants under the university’s minority admissions program….”

      “When the case went to the U.S. Supreme Court in 1978, all of the major black civil rights organizations filed amicus briefs supporting the university’s affirmative action program. The Big Three Jewish defense agencies all filed briefs supporting Bakke. It was the first direct, public, head-on confrontation between the black and Jewish communities over a basic civil rights issue. The blacks lost.” (p317,318, "Jewish Power: Inside the American Jewish Establistment," J.J. Goldberg)

      And Hophmi, please note that when pursuing affirmative action for Jews, the Jewish organizations represented Blacks, and when opposing so-called "reverse discrimination," these same organizations represented white Christians to hide their self-interests.

    • SIBIRIAK- "But, I take it, you accept that universalism and multiculturalism can co-exist in a pluralist democracy.

      If so, what element defines the difference between Jewish “tribalism” and a strong Jewish ethno-cultural identity compatible with universalism/multicultural democracy?"

      Very good series of questions which will permit me to discuss this more thoroughly. Thank you. I will begin with three paragraphs which hopefully will provide a clear and concise description of multiculturalism versus tribalism. I will then address any of your questions not covered by the initial three paragraphs.

      Multiculturalism refers to the acceptance of different cultures within a society such that these cultural differences are not seen as an impediment to social harmony. In ideal form, it represents the acceptance of different cultural manifestations as but a part of the whole fabric of a unified society, and rejects cultural homogenization as essential to a shared social identity. Shared diversity, if you will.

      Multiculturalism is very different from tribalism and sectarianism which seek to divide a society based upon tribal groupings, each exhibiting an "us" versus "them" group loyalty which fundamentally rejects a unified society of diverse equals. The tribe is more concerned with the group than with the individual member.

      For a variety of reasons, American Jews have a relatively strong sense of tribal identity, even as they have promoted multiculturalism for non-Jews. One consequence is that non-Jews have come to accept Jews (who they usually are unable to identify as Jews in any event) as an integral part of the body politic, whereas, many Jews continue to see the world through the eyes of Jews as apart from non-Jews.

      SIBIRIAK- "What distinquishes Jewish “tribalism” from other forms of non-“tribal” ethno-cultural or religioius identities that abound in pluralist societies?"

      The "us" versus "them" emphasis in Jewish tribalism which exists in varying degrees and which usually manifests itself when widely different individual Jews (Orthodox and secular, for example) unite as Jews to pursue a "Jewish" agenda.

      SIBIRIAK- "Can we apply that formula across the board? Or is there something special about Jewish identity that makes it tribal, while other strong ethno-cultural/ religious identities are not tribal?"

      Any group which sees its identity as apart from the rest of society qualifies as tribal. Notice I said group. There are a lot of alienated individuals in our society who obviously are not a tribe, even though many of them might take some comfort there. One characteristic of Jewish tribalism which may be unique is the transnational nature of the tribal identity such that Israel can claim to be the state of world Jewry and the French CRIF is a member of the World Zionist Organization and can count on American Jewish Zionist support as they pursue a Jewish Zionist agenda in France. I am unaware of any other self-defined ethnic group which yields this type of power.

      The one group which may in some respects be somewhat comparable are the diaspora Chinese throughout Asia who tend to stick together and who frequently dominate the local economy of the various SE Asia nations. And who have a history of experiencing pogroms when the locals rebel. I am under the impression that the Chinese, however, have stayed out of politics and lack political power. Perhaps this somehow relates to the lack of multiculturalism in some of these countries. My knowledge of the diaspora Chinese is very limited and I don't want to presume too much. Perhaps Tokyobk who has some scholarly knowledge in this area can comment on this.

      SIBIRIAK- "What are the other key factors in Jewish success?"

      Confining ourselves to individuals, the factors would be the same for any individual whether Jew or non-Jew. Education, ambition, hard work, etc. Once anyone climbs high enough in any organization, organizational politics plays a key role. Machiavelli placed a great emphasis upon artful deception and cunning, which I tend to agree with.

      "I have found it always true, that men do seldom or never advance themselves from a small beginning, to any great height, but by fraud, or by force (unless they come by it by donation, or right of inheritance). I do not think any instance can be found where force alone brought any man to grandeur, but fraud and artifice have done it many times...." (p67, "The Machiavellians," James Burnham)

    • YONAH FREDMAN- "Keith- It’s lindenmann’s quote and i would not wish to back up his quote."

      Say what? You quoted someone you disagree with? Enough of the BS, Yonah. Unless you can list these "distinctively Jewish traits," you can stick your quote where the sun don't shine. If I had referred to "distinctively Jewish traits," I would have been labeled an anti-Semite, even by you. So, put up or shut up!

    • HOPHMI- "This is straight out of the White supremacist playbook."

      All you do is name call. Perhaps you have some examples of me engaging in a "White supremacist playbook?" No, you engage hostile name calling to avoid this issue which Zionists don’t want discussed. And you are the very essence of tribalism, continuing to think of Jews from centuries past as "your people" while thinking of the non-Jew at the next desk as an irrational murderous Jew-hater. Again and again you fulminate with vile accusations. And what is Zionism if not an attempt to recreate the Jewish peoplehood of the pre-modern Classical Judaism in nationalist form? And as for white supremacism, after affirmative action served its purpose, the about face of the major Jewish organizations to oppose "reverse discrimination" exemplifies world class hypocrisy. Yes, let us desegregate the South, but New York? God forbid! A quote for you.

      "The number of blacks seeking admission to elite universities in the 1940s was very small. By speaking on behalf of blacks as well as Jews, however, Jewish groups were able to present themselves as fighting for the abstract and quintessential American principles of fair play and equal justice rather than the selfish interests of Jews alone. This would not be the last time that Jewish organizations found that helping blacks could serve their own interests as well." (p99, "The Fatal Embrace: Jews and the State," Benjamin Ginsberg)

      And once Jewish interests were served, the Blacks got thrown under the bus. Reverse discrimination, indeed. I still support affirmative action, it is you with the Ashkenazi supremacist playbook.

    • YONAH FREDMAN- "...dropping all distinctively Jewish traits, allegiances or habits of mind."

      Okay Yonah, You have piqued my interest. Can you give me a small feel for some of those "distinctively Jewish traits, allegiances, or habits of mind?"

    • ELJAY- "Hmmm…no Commenter Profile. rugal_b / a4tech, is that you (again)? :-)

      One has to question why a commenter would adopt a name which prevents a commenter profile record of his/her comments. And why would Mondoweiss allow such names to be used? Something is not Kosher.

    • FRENCH JEW- "These last five years it has been mobilized in the public space by the truly vehement far right and antisemitic agitator Alain Soral. And I’m talking about real antisemitism here, not Israeli propaganda masquerading critiques of its State as “antisemitism”.

      How do you feel about the French government's prosecution of Alain Soral for anti-Semitism? How about the charges against Dieudonne? Any thoughts on the CRIF?

    • PHIL- "...I welcome anyone who wants to revive Jewish life on anti-Zionist principles. Simone Zimmerman seems to be such a person. There are many others. I dont oppose tribalism perse...."

      You can have universalism or you can have tribalism, but you can't have both at the same time and place. And when a modern nation state reverts to various tribal factions, that is called sectarianism, and civil strife frequently follows, perhaps leading to the breakup of the state. That is what happened in Yugoslavia (with US help) and Iraq (with US help), and is happening in Syria (with US/Israel help). In the US, the Zionists have created a different reality. Here you have tribalism for the (mostly Zionist) organized Jews and universalism for the non-Jews (plus unorganized universalist Jews). In effect, Jewish tribalism hiding behind multiculturalism's skirts. It is a key factor in Jewish success, one which Zionists don't want discussed.

      Currently, Zionism is primarily what unites the various strands of Jews into a tribal entity of those who may have little in common other than support for Israel. Anti-Zionism unites the various strands of Jews into a looser tribal entity of those who may have little in common other than a desire to disassociate themselves from Israel and Zionism while maintaining some sort of tribal association. Post Zionists Jews are those Jews who want to maintain a tribal identity without Israel or Zionism, relying instead on the positive perks of tribal kinship and nepotism to achieve a sort of modern birthright guild of professional privilege. Perhaps a solidifying of social mobility will permit this to occur. Perhaps not. In any event, marriage should be more or less a non-issue. One could argue that a secular Jew marrying a secular non-Jew is hardly "outmarrying", whereas, a secular Jew marrying an Orthodox Jew is. Besides, compatibility rates high with me, religious compatibility an important issue.

      As for Simone Zimmerman, she is rather obviously an anti-Zionist tribalist, with strong tribal feelings. The picture of her holding a sign saying "We (I assume she means Jews) were once slaves" speaks volumes. When exactly were the Jews slaves? Surely, not the mythological bondage in Egypt? It would be fascinating to see her rendition of the history of Jews and slavery. But I don't want to be too harsh. Perhaps her version of tribal anti-Zionism will do some good.

  • Sanders hires a Jewish critic of Israel, as Clinton gets 'Daily News' nod as 'warrior realist'
    • MOOSER- "Of course, and “Hophmi” is right, I have been ignoring all the “Jews of color”."

      So has Wall Street.

      MOOSER- "Do the “Jews of color” have the same “historical homeland” as the “white Jews”? And did we start out all diverse, or did diversity come when some Jews got exiled to the north and some got exiled to the south, with more sun?"

      Wicked! Keep up the good work, Moose. You can say things that I can't. I continue to have moderation difficulties. Apparently, Hophmi is having an impact with his anti-Keith diatribes. Sad but true.

    • "Some anti-Sanders groups already have seized upon Zimmerman’s hire, first disclosed in a JTA story published Monday, as fodder for their argument that a Sanders presidency would be bad for the Jews."

      Why would a Sanders presidency be bad for the Jews? Bad for individual Jews or bad for the Jewish people/tribe? Why would an evaluation of whether or not Sanders would be good or bad for the Jews versus whether or not Sanders would be good or bad for the US citizenry, and good or bad for global humanity be considered appropriate?

  • Goldman Sachs is funding Hebron settlers
    • "So why did Goldman Sachs Charitable Gift Fund, a foundation connected to the world’s most powerful investment bank and run by Goldman Sachs’ top executives, donate $18,000 to the Brooklyn-based Hebron Fund that bankrolls this humanitarian nightmare?"

      Perhaps they, along with Hophmi, are planning on making Aliyah to escape the plague of anti-Semitism which confronts New York Jews on a daily basis. It must be tough living in constant fear, taking cold comfort from cold cash. Perhaps, one day Israel will be the financial capitol of the global empire. From what I read, it is corrupt enough.

  • Against Balance: Thoughts on teaching Israel/Palestine
    • JON S- "One of the problems with your comment is that Zionism pre-dates the Holocaust."

      Yes, but Zionism has changed over time as it abandoned its secular roots to become increasingly Jewish. Part of the change involved the strong emphasis on the Holocaust and eternal and irrational Gentile anti-Semitism which was strongly promoted by the Holocaust Industry (Finkelstein) following the 1967 Six Day War. A quote for you.

      “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.” (Uri Avnery).

    • MOOSER- "I know, “Jons” we were ‘crucified’ by the Holocaust and now we are resurrected by Israel ?"

      Was it Jon S that said that? At the time, I stayed out of the exchange, however, now I want to express support for that analogy. Hate me if you will (a lot do ) but I tend to agree with the analogy. It accurately encapsulates the essence of the Holocaust religion which underpins Zionism. Seriously. If you think about it, for many (most?) Zionists, Israel represents salvation/heaven, and as such takes on a metaphysical dimension. For most American Jews, Israel is a symbol totally divorced from the reality of actual Israel. They simply can't conceive of Israel as an oppressive, militaristic, racist society. Zionists neither doubt nor denigrate heaven.

  • BDS has arrived
    • MOOSER- "Use a “safety squawk” when things go too far."

      You should also point out that in Seattle it is perfectly legal to "ride the Ducks," if Hophmi wants to get his feet wet with no strings attached. They do, however, charge a small fee upfront.

  • Israeli journalist Derfner succinctly analyzes the anti-Semitism vs. anti-Zionism debate
    • PABELMONT- "And of course looking at numbers (or percentages), he says that the percent of antisemites among anti-Zionists is small and the number of anti-Muslims among Zionists is large. Let’s all remember that."

      Absolutely! I would also suggest that the percent of anti-Semites among anti-Zionists is also smaller - perhaps much smaller - than the number of anti-Gentiles among Zionists. Irrational perceptions of anti-Semitism is common among Zionists, and indicates a belief in irrational Jew-hatred as intrinsic to non-Jews. This belief that Gentiles are the eternal enemy of Jews motivates much Zionist thought and action. One has only to observe some of our Zionist commenters to observe this phenomenon on full display.

  • 'Israel will not have better friend in White House than Hillary' -- Clinton adviser assures NY
    • HOPHMI- "And whatever pretensions you may have, this site, and anti-Zionist in general, remains the province of a fringe few."

      Since you keep hanging out here, one can only assume that rubbing elbows with the "fringe few" is a guilty pleasure? And as much as you rail against me and try to get me banned, I sense that deep down inside this is your unconventional way of trying to bond with me in the hope that one day, with work and effort, you too can spell Albert Shanker correctly.

  • Zionism is not really secular
    • HOPHMI- "Right, the frequent massacres and expulsions of Jews throughout the Middle Ages, culminating in the murder of 6,000,000 of them at once was not persecution."

      Do you have any data to support your propagandistic assertion that Jews were massacred more than other groups? In the 30 Years War, for example, about 1/3 of the population of Prussia was killed. How many Jews? Now, Jews were involved, Jewish bankers providing the funding for the slaughter, Jewish provisioners profiting from the bloody business. If need be, I can take the time and provide quotes to support this. How about you? Put up or shut up. All you do is regurgitate your repetitious Hasbara. You are your only expert. You are guided exclusively by the Zionist ideology, empirical reality your mortal enemy.

      And I have already indicated that it is ludicrous to maintain some sort of continuum between pre-modern anti-Semitism and modern anti-Semitism. The implication of your assertion is that Gentiles are eternal irrational Jew-haters. This is the belief of an anti-Gentile Zionist. And you are not even consistent. In one of your other comments you state that Jewish success was dependent upon who was in power. Israel Shahak says the same thing, so does Benjamin Ginsberg. If Jewish success (and anti-Semitism) had its ups and downs, then this suggests something involving the struggle for power and the prevailing power relations, not eternal and irrational anti-Semitism. If the latter were the case, there would be no ups and downs, and Jews would not have had periods of great success. All of these things imply intimate involvement in the struggle for power in Europe, an extremely violent and bloody place for most of its history. You are an unrepentant tribalist trying to squelch legitimate discussion of the political economy.

    • HOPHMI- "Did you get that quote from Rense, Keith? I notice they have it there."

      Ah, yes, rense.com. Isn't rense.com that Zionist Black Ops website designed to taint inconvenient truths by association with an "anti-Semitic" website? I am sure that it is your go-to site when you are desperate to smear? In the past, even I had linked to rense.com because of a Google search. The information I sought was accurately quoted. I was unaware of any problem until recently Kay24 linked to rense.com and Jon S questioned her choice of the anti-Semitic rense.com. I asked him to show the anti-Semitism. He sent a link to an article on rense.com which was blatantly anti-Semitic. What is going on here? Since a lot of us naive folk are being directed to rense.com by Google, the connection snapped into place. Google has close ties to the US State Department and is a powerhouse at the anti-BDS Council on Foreign Relations. If you can't hide it, taint it. And for someone like me who has figured this out and will not quote rense.com under any circumstances, you claim that just because the Zionist Black Ops website quotes something, it is tainted in any event. How convenient. How dishonest. How scurrilous. How Hophmi.

      As for Google, it is a very convenient search engine, however, never believe, even for a minute, that Google is your friend. Google is an extremely powerful corporation that is practically synonymous with global empire and neoliberalism. They are a dominating force on the Council of Foreign Relations. Their business model is based upon data mining and, I suspect, that the US government (NSA?) is a primary customer. We all have a government spy and agent provocateur in our homes. It is our computer. Use with caution. For some additional reading, I suggest "WikiLeaks: When Google Met WikiLeaks" by Julian Assange and "Revolution in the Age of Social Media: The Egyptian Popular Insurrection and the Internet" by Linda Herrera. The second book highlights the involvement of Google executives in the Arab Spring. The facts are good, the conclusions timid and conventional. Finally, all of this ties in with color revolutions and hybrid war.

    • YONAH FREDMAN- "Keith- Powerful financiers like the Rothschilds and court Jews does not change the political facts regarding the 99% of Jews who were not financiers. There was persecution, political persecution."

      Are you in deep denial, or what? No, the actions of the 1% does not change the political facts of the 99%. That doesn't alter anything I have said. Can you even conceive of a Black Rothschilds? The Jews have always been RELATIVELY privileged. Why do you deny this? Why do you continue to pretend that the relatively powerful and privileged Jews are victims? Are American Jews subject to persecution? Is AIPAC weak? Is the current reality unique? Or have Jews had political/economic power for centuries? And, are you invested in Jewish victimhood?

    • YONAH FREDMAN- "Until then your biased ignorant statements stand as stupidity that needs some comedian to liven them up."

      No need to be euphemistic, Yonah, just come out and say what you think. Are you referring to my biased, ignorant, stupid quotes from scholars?

      Your claim that the Jews in Czarist Russia "lived in submission" implies an overbearing control of their activities similar to serfdom, which is not the case. That they were restricted to the Pale of Settlement is not the same as victimization, something which you project onto all of Jewish history rendering it Zionist myth history. The actual history indicates that Jews in the Pale of Settlement had considerable autonomy over their lives, not that they lived in submission, your somewhat ambiguous phrase. Another biased, ignorant ,stupid quote for you. By the way, why don't you turn the tables on me a provide some quotes of your own rather than simply mouthing off? You interpret everything as Jewish victimhood.

      "At the turn of the twentieth century, most of Europe's Jews (5.2 out of about 8.7 million) lived in the Russian Empire, where they constituted about 4 percent of the total population. Most of Russia's Jews (about 90 percent) resided in the Pale of Settlement, to which they were legally restricted. Most of the Jews in the Pale of Settlement (all but about 4 percent who were farmers or factory workers) continued to pursue traditional service occupations as middlemen between the overwhelmingly agricultural Christian population and various urban markets. Most of the Jewish middlemen bought, shipped, and resold local produce; provided credit on the security of standing crops and other items; leased and managed estates and various processing facilities (such as tanneries, distilleries, and sugar mills); kept taverns and inns, supplied manufactured goods (as peddlers, shopkeepers, or wholesale importers); provided professional services (most commonly as doctors and pharmacists); and served as artisans (from rural blacksmiths, tailors, and shoe makers to highly specialized jewelers and watchmakers). The proportion of the various pursuits could vary, but the association of Jews with the service sector (including small-scale craftsmanship) remained very strong" (p105, "The Jewish Century," Yuri Slezkine)

    • HOPHMI- "Did you get that quote from Rense, Keith? I notice they have it there."

      Did you fail to notice the citation? The quote comes from Benjamin Ginsberg. You seem to spend an inordinate amount of time surfing the web in search of anything you can construe as anti-Semitism as befits your role as a Zionist propagandist.

      HOPHMI- "Keith reminds us that antisemitic tropes about Jews in finance...."

      Trope? You mean that Jews haven't been prominent in finance? Trope is just a label you use to denigrate a true statement that otherwise you are unable to counter. Actually, your comment is one long series of insults, accusations, dishonest conflations, and propaganda.

      HOPHMI- "Maybe Keith could save himself some time by just posting a link to the Protocols of the Elders of Zion in lieu of commenting, since his comments amount to the same thing."

      More conflation from Mondoweiss' most intellectually dishonest commenter.

      HOPHMI- "It’s complete with a selective quote from Benjamin Ginsburg’s book...."

      You have a problem with this Professor of Political Science at John Hopkins University? Speaking of quotes, your comments are typically quote free. Don't want to cite the Israeli Ministry of Propaganda? No, better to simply call me an anti-Semite again and again and again, etc. Your comments clearly demonstrate that Zionism and Zionists are anti-Gentile to the core. You in particular literally seethe with hostility.

    • HOPHMI- "And here we have that brand of anti-Zionism that denies Jews were actually ever persecuted in Europe...."

      I never said that there was never any persecution, I said that relatively speaking they were not a persecuted people compared to other people, primarily the peasants whom they helped the nobility to subjugate and control. Pogroms notwithstanding, they had relatively more power and privilege than the average Gentile, and in some cases accumulated considerable wealth, something a group actually suffering the never ending victimhood of Jewish myth-history would be unable to do. And look at you, a privileged lawyer constantly complaining about negligible Jew hatred. Gilded victimhood, says I.

      HOPHMI- "Also, ladies and gentlemen, it’s bizarre to note that antisemitism before the Shoah had any relationship to the antisemitism that resulted in the Shoah."

      Indeed, it is bizarre to talk about religiously based anti-Semtism and peasant uprisings of the pre-modern era, prior to the separation of church and state, with the racially based, organized modern anti-Semitism. The conditions were radically different. Don't like Finkelstein? Let us look at Shahak and Slezkine.

      "We must, first, draw a sharp distinction between the persecution of Jews during the classical period on the one hand, and the Nazi extermination on the other. The former were popular movements coming from below; whereas the latter was was inspired, organised and carried out from above: indeed by state officials. Such acts as the Nazi state-organised extermination are relatively rare in human history...." (p64, Jewish History, Jewish Religion," Israel Shahak)

      "Most important, they were affected by Russia's late-nineteenth-century modernization in ways that were more direct, profound, and fundamental than most other Russian communities because their very existence as a specialized caste was at stake. The emancipation of the serfs, the demise of the manorial economy, and the expansion of the economic role of the state rendered the role of the traditional Mercurian mediator between the countryside and the town economically irrelevant, legally precarious, and increasingly dangerous." (p115, "The Jewish Century," Yuri Slezkine)

    • YONAH FREDMAN- "From 1790 to 1917 the Jews under the czar lived in submission. Political if not economic submission."

      What, no democracy under the Czar? Shocking! But was it political repression because they were Jews, or because they were frequently socialists or Marxists who refused to recognize Czarist Russia's right to exist as a Czarist state?

      You were wise to exclude economic submission because the Jews were, on average, better off than the Gentiles, the majority of whom were serfs/peasants. A concluding quote regarding the status of the Gentile peasants.

      "The whole racist propaganda on the theme of the supposed superiority of Jewish morality and intellect (in which many Jewish socialists were prominent) is bound up with a lack of sensitivity for the suffering of that major part of humanity who were especially oppressed during the last thousand years - the peasants." (p53, Jewish History, Jewish Religion," Israel Shahak)

    • Keith April 11, 2016, 2:50 pm
      HOPHMI- “I think that centuries of European persecution, culminating in the Shoah….”

      More myth history from Hophmi. First a quote relevant to persecution.

      “In the less heavily urbanized and commercialized European periphery, the savings of Jewish merchants and traders represented one of the few sources of liquid capital. Jewish financiers could mobilize this this capital and provide monarchs with loans to underwrite war making and state building. Thus, in Central Europe, so-called Court Jews served as administrators, financiers, and military provisioners.”
      ….
      Jews continued to serve absolutist states in these ways through the nineteenth century. The most prominent of these Jews, of course, was the Rothschild family whose name came to be synonymous with international finance….By mid-century, the entire European state system was dependent upon the international financial network dominated by the Rothschilds.”
      (p17,18, “The Fatal Embrace: Jews and the State,” Benjamin Ginsberg)

      This doesn’t sound like a persecuted people to me, conflicts with non-Jews notwithstanding. Nothing even remotely comparable to how Black slaves were treated and how Blacks continue to be treated even as “persecuted” Jews accumulate power. Now let us deal with the bizarre notion that premodern anti-Semitism and modern anti-Semitism are, in fact, a seamless continuum “culminating” in the Shoah.

      “Two central dogmas underpin the Holocaust framework: (1) The Holocaust marks a categorically unique historical event; (2) The Holocaust marks the climax of an irrational, eternal Gentile hatred of Jews. Neither of these dogmas figured at all in public discourse before the June 1967 war; and, although they became the centerpieces of Holocaust literature, neither figures at all in genuine scholarship on the Nazi holocaust. On the other hand, both dogmas draw on important strands in Judaism and Zionism.

      In the aftermath of World War II, the Nazi holocaust was not cast as a uniquely Jewish – let alone historically unique – event. Organized American Jewry in particular was at pains to place it in a universalist context. After the June war, however, the Nazi Final Solution was radically transformed.” (p41, 42, “The Holocaust Industry,” Norman Finkelstein)

    • HOPHMI- "...whether Jews should live in exile and submission...."

      The Eastern European converts to Judaism never lived in exile, and Jews never lived in submission. To the contrary, they have always been above the majority of the Gentile population. You continue to spread falsehoods and propaganda. A quote for you:

      "During the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries, Jews came to play a major role in the fiscal affairs and administration of the Ottoman empire....Jews dominated the imperial revenue system, serving as tax collectors, tax farmers, tax intendants, and tax inspectors. Jews also created and operated the imperial customs service. Indeed, so complete was Jewish control over this segment of the Ottomon state that Ottomon customs receipts were typically written in Hebrew." (p15, "The Fatal Embrace: Jews and the State," Benjamin Ginsberg)

      This is just one of many examples which clearly indicate that as a group Jews were relatively privileged and empowered. In fact, because of this, what you call pogroms were usually peasant rebellions against the nobility who employed the Jews to administer the peasants, hence, the title of the book I referenced.

  • Attachment to Israel is 'central part of Jewish identity,' Forward editor says
    • YONAH FREDMAN- "Yet the universalism of Allen Ginsberg say, will lead to the disappearance of the jews...."

      Are you aware of the implications of what you have said? If one core definition of a Jew is someone who believes in and practices the Judaic religion, then you are saying that universalism will lead to the disappearance of the Judaic religion? Or are you saying that tribalism is such an integral part of Judaism that a universalistic Judaism isn't really Judaism?Apparently, you are more concerned with the continuity of the tribe, the Judaic religion merely a means to that end.

  • Advocate for 'white British people' bridles when Rula Jebreal mentions race
    • BRYAN- "That is surely to ignore a certain cultural symbiosis: Britain’s wealth, and indeed its industrial revolution and urbanisation was based around the slave trade (esp. Bristol and Liverpool) and the triangular trade (imports of raw cotton and rum from the Americas and sales of trinkets to Africa) plus the exploitation of India (the jewel in the crown), Malaysia (rubber and tin), Nigeria (oil and minerals) and many other colonies."

      True enough, yet how many British school children are educated about the dark side of their imperial history, even as they are taught about the Holocaust?

  • Shocker: 'NYT' forum on anti-Zionism tilts toward equating Zionism with racism
    • SHERENE SEIKALY QUOTE- "Zionism is a national political movement that began in the late 19th century as a response to anti-Semitism."

      Partly true, however, a primary motivation was to prevent assimilation and preserve Jewish tribalism. Zionism always was about preserving the Jewish people, never about saving individual Jews.

      LISA GOLDMAN QUOTE- "The most important element is neither God nor religion but the Holocaust...."

      The Holocaust is a core component of Zionism. If Herzl was the father of Zionism, then Hitler was the accidental midwife to the birth of Israel.

      LISA GOLDMAN QUOTE- "But openly identifying as a non-Zionist is anathema to Jewish communal life."

      Communal life? Multicultural communal solidarity and kinship?

  • 'Zionism is nationalism, not Judaism,' a former Hebrew school teacher explains
    • HOPHMI- "For Keith, there’s such a thing as “Jewish money”, apparently, and he has an issue with it....How long is this bigot going to be permitted to stay here?"

      Has Phil Weiss ever used the phrase "Jewish money"? Do you think that Phil is a bigot who should be banned from Mondoweiss?

    • HOPHMI- "Money doesn’t have a religion. I’ve never seen anyone here refer to “Muslim money”.

      HOPHMI (2/19/16)- "Lol. Yeah. Like Harvard (and Georgetown and many others) don’t accept Saudi money with strings attached to teach Middle Eastern Studies with an Arabist slant." link to mondoweiss.net

    • HOPHMI- "How long is this bigot going to be permitted to stay here?"

      Well, if it isn't Mr. insults and accusations come pay me a visit. Trying to improve your image by associating your name with mine? An act of desperation to be sure, but in your case probably justified.

    • HOPHMI- "I imagine you’re amazed on a regular basis, especially since you talk a lot about antisemitism but don’t even know who the progenitor of the term is."

      Well, if it isn't Mr. you-are-an-anti-Semite himself pointing fingers yet again. It is because of Zionists like you that I came to realize that not only was the accusation of anti-Semitism a useful weapon in your Zionist tool kit, but also a key element in the creation of internal Zionist solidarity. Perceived anti-Semitism is a core component of the Zionist ideology and of Jewish Zionist power seeking. I have no interest in Marr or his history. You obviously only bring him up in an attempt to conflate me with him in your typical dishonest fashion in an attempt to stifle discussion of an important aspect of contemporary political economy.

      HOPHMI- "That’s why you obsess over how much money Jews have, how many are billionaires, etc."

      Oh, I hardly obsess over it. In fact, I am less concerned with the ethnic/religious makeup of the oligarchy than with the fact of oligarchy, as you should be if you had a progressive bone in your body. A core feature of capitalism is the monetization of power. Money is power, economic power in fluid form, the primary instrument of social control. Jewish money has become an issue because of the extent to which it has become such a significant factor in influencing the direction of the political economy. That such a relatively small minority is such an overwhelmingly significant source of campaign finances is shocking. And if you think that I am a fan of the non-Jewish billionaires, you are nuts. We don't need more non-Jewish billionaires, we need to rid ourselves of ALL billionaires. Wealth and power are much too concentrated in our society and these issues need to be discussed.

    • SIBIRIAK- "In your view, would Jewish over-representation in the “doctrinal system” not be a serious problem if it were not for that support of Israel?"

      In the big scheme of things, I am not as concerned with Jewish overrepresentation in the doctrinal system as it may appear. There are other issues involving the survival of the species that are much more serious.

      As for support for Israel and a rhetorical strategy, I consider Zionism and support for Israel as essential for the creation of the tribal solidarity which enabled the massive accumulation of power by the Jewish Zionists. American Jewish success and Zionism are inexorably linked. Whether or not the current level of dominance is sustainable without something like Zionism is debatable. The general social inertia in regards to concentrated power is such that Zionism was a necessary factor in the replacement of the East Coast Protestant elites. Whether this inertia is enough to keep post-Zionist Jews at the top of the heap is unknown. In any event, I do consider a de facto caste system a significant social problem which, ideally, should be ameliorated over time, something which I don't see happening.

      On an even more serious note, I believe that we are entering a transition period as the financial system and neoliberalism inexorably lead to a neofeudal dystopia, unless we stumble into a terminal nuclear war. We have come full circle from the rule of nobility by divine right to the rule of financiers by the divine right of capital. Barring war, the power of the Jewish elites can only increase. Lord Blankfein, Great Lord Goldman Sachs.

    • MOOSER- "So maybe 2% (very approximate, I’m sure it can be fixed with more precision) in the US would be good?"

      I am less concerned about attaching specific percentages to particular ethnic groupings than I am about the overall concentration of power in our political economy, primarily in the concentration of wealth which roughly translates to power in capitalism. I am more concerned about the fact of oligarchs than about the ethnicity of these oligarchs. Because Mondoweiss is concerned with the Middle East and the Jewish state and the American Jewish support for the Jewish state, I wind up discussing these issues more than they really concern me. My top concern is nuclear war, followed by environmental collapse, followed by social collapse leading to neofeudalism, however, those aren't appropriate Mondoweiss topics. I do, however, find Jewish tribalism and power seeking an interesting topic both for what it reveals about the political economy and power distribution, and how it effects US policy towards Israel. As I hope you are aware, how a society handles the distribution of power is critically important and rather complex. There are no easy answers, however, this ongoing Jewish effort to sweep Jewish power under the rug isn't helping achieve understanding. And no, I don't think that having Jews as de facto birthright Mandarins is wholesome. Nor is the circling of wagons when the topic comes up. Interestingly, you can locate Jewish websites where Jewish success and power is the occasion for considerable braggadocio. But that is for intended for tribal use only.

    • HOPHMI- "Says you and Wilhelm Marr."

      It always amazes me the extent to which you Zionists tirelessly search for examples of anti-Semitism. Once again I find myself compared to someone I never heard of. I gather that you have read him rather extensively. Actually, you seem quite obsessed with searching for the faintest hints of what you falsely claim is anti-Semitism. You wear your anti-Gentile chauvinism on your sleeve, Hophmi.

      HOPHMI- "Entire doctrinal system?"

      Do you deny that Jews are disproportionately influential in the doctrinal system?

      HOPHMI- "Right, because Jews aren’t just 25% of McGill. They’re the Jewish 25%, and they act collectively, and use their influence collectively."

      Organized Jewry most certainly acts collectively to influence the political economy to the benefit of (primarily Zionist) Jews and to influence US foreign policy to support Israel. Are you actually going to deny this? From the website of the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations:

      "Every day, the Conference of Presidents Fund works publicly and behind the scenes raising vital concerns with scores of US and world leaders about Israel's security and vitality, threats posed by a nuclear Iran, global terrorism and anti-Semitism, making a critical difference at home and abroad." link to conferenceofpresidents.org

    • MOOSER- "“Keith” you could go a long way towards dismissing those charges by abandoning the insidious inspecificity of words like “overrepresented” and using numbers. Statistics!"

      Any idea who compiles such statistics? Jewish organizations, most likely. Hell, before I came to Mondoweiss, I had no idea that Larry Summers was Jewish. Same with Martin Indyk, Dennis Ross, et al. Hells bells, Moose, if I were to devote serious time to this that would be taken as prima facie evidence that I was a (gasp!) Jew hobbiest!

      As a general rule, when the numbers are readily available (almost always provided by Jews), I consider significant multiples of the population percent to represent clear cut instances of "overrepresentation," as relates to the whole population. For example, in the thread on Nit In Aundzer Nomen, the students indicated the need for Jewish solidarity to represent Jewish interests on campus because of a previous incident of quotas to limit Jewish enrollment at McGill University back when Jewish enrollment was 25% of the student body. Since Jews constitute !% of the population of Canada, that means that Jewish enrollment was 25X of their population base. A rather significant example of overrepresentation, don't you think? Now one can debate whether this represents a problem and what, if anything should be done about it, but I think that disproportionate influence in the intelligentsia and the entire doctrinal system is something which we should be aware of and be able to discuss. Surely, having a de facto ethnic caste system should be a cause for concern, particularly since wealth and power continues to flow upward. I hope you are not suggesting that we don't discuss these issues unless I, as a commenter, provide elaborate statistical data? If what I say is nothing but crap, surely you or Hophmi can provide the relevant statistical data to show my ignorance. I seem to recall Phil talking about Jewish wealth and power, so maybe I am not a bigot after all.

    • HOPHMI- "...who is willing to take on the antisemitism in the BDS movement...."

      Why don't you submit an article? I would be most interested in seeing all of the examples of anti-Semitism that you are aware of.

    • TZVIA THIER QUOTE- "Anti-semitism is hating Jews for being Jews."

      This is the classic definition of anti-Semitism, however, people are rarely labeled as anti-Semites based upon this definition. Most are labeled as anti-Semites based upon the operational definition of being an impediment to Jewish Zionist power seeking. Think about it. Suppose I claim that Jews are significantly overrepresented on Wall Street. Does this indicate hatred of Jews? Whether this claimed overrepresentation is true or not is another matter. And if true, what the consequences are is also another matter. Yet, to state that Jews are overrepresented in the media, finance or among the elites in general will inevitably bring forth charges of engaging in anti-Semitic tropes. And once the label is successfully attached, Jew hatred will be inferred. This is a tried and true method for discouraging inquiry into social inequality and of the distribution of power in our political economy.

Showing comments 1300 - 1201
Page: