Trending Topics:

Hannah Arendt would agree with Ilhan Omar

on 41 Comments

Rep. Ilhan Omar’s comments last week in Washington that seemed to question the allegiance of Americans who advocate tirelessly for Israel have incurred the wrath of those advocates, who charge her with anti-Semitism. And even folks in the middle may wonder, Well, was Rep. Omar tapping into ancient stereotypes about Jews as a nation within a nation?

But Omar’s critique goes to the nature of Zionism; and it was anticipated by the Jewish philosopher Hannah Arendt. Arendt’s prophetic writings about Zionism in the 1940s described the “double-loyalty” issue for American Jews that Israel would bring on them, by compelling them to be “the lobbies” for an embattled Jewish state.

Arendt was alarmed by the arrogance of Israel’s founders, in proceeding with contempt for their Arab neighbors. So long as the Jewish state had the enmity of its neighbors, she said, the country would be forced to rely on a superpower’s protection, and therefore on the lobbying of U.S. Jews, who would thereby open themselves to the dual loyalty charge.

In her 1944 essay “Zionism Reconsidered,” Arendt, a refugee from Nazi Germany who died in New York in 1975 at age 69, wrote that the double loyalty issue for American Jews was “unavoidable.” (Emphases mine).

Here enters the double-loyalty conflict, never clearly answered, which is an unavoidable problem of every national movement of a people living within the boundaries of other states and unwilling to resign their civil and political rights therein…

Without the power and resources of American Jewry, above all, the catastrophe in Europe would have been a deadly blow to Palestine Jewry, politically as well as economically. If a Jewish commonwealth is obtained in the near future–with or without partition–it will be due to the political influence of American Jews. This would not need to affect their status of American citizenship if their “homeland,” or “mother country,” were a politically autonomous entity in a normal sense, or if their help were likely to be only temporary. But if the Jewish commonwealth is proclaimed against the will of the Arabs and without the support of the Mediterranean peoples, not only financial help but political support will be necessary for a long time to come. And that may turn out to be very troublesome indeed for Jews in this country, who after all have no power to direct the political destinies of the Near East. It may eventually be far more of a responsibility than today they imagine or tomorrow can make good.

That passage is so forceful because Arendt predicted the rise of the Israel lobby: influential Zionist individuals and organizations that would be called upon to shape American policy. That has come to pass, particularly in the wake of the 1967 and 1973 wars, when many American Jews felt Israel’s existence was at stake and organizations like the AJC and AIPAC and the ADL took on the mission of holding the breathing tube. And it has gone on “for a long time to come.”

Israel’s reliance on “lobbies” and a superpower, rather than the goodwill of its neighbors, was a folly that was not good for Jews, Arendt said:

[T]he Zionists, if they continue to ignore the Mediterranean people and watch out only for the big faraway powers, will appear only as their tools, the agents of foreign and hostile interests. Jews who know their own history should be aware that such a state of affairs will inevitably lead to a new wave of Jew-hatred; the antisemitism of tomorrow will assert that Jews not only profiteered from the presence of foreign big powers in that region but had actually plotted it and hence are guilty of the consequences…

[T]he Zionists ended by making the Jewish national emancipation entirely dependent upon the material interests of another nation.

The actual result was a return of the new movement to the traditional methods of shtadlonus [court Jews], which the Zionists once had so bitterly despised and violently denounced. Now Zionists too knew no better place politically than the lobbies of the powerful, and no sounder basis for agreements than their good services as agents of foreign interests…

[O]nly folly could dictate a policy which trusts a distant imperial power for protection, while alienating the goodwill of neighbors

Four years later, witnessing the 1948 war of Israel’s independence — and Nakba — Arendt predicted (accurately) that Israel would devolve into a militaristic state.

And even if the Jews were to win the war, its end would find the unique possibilities and the unique achievements of Zionism in Palestine destroyed. The land that would come into being would be something quite other than the dream of world Jewry, Zionist and non-Zionist. The ‘victorious’ Jews would live surrounded by an entirely hostile Arab population, secluded into ever-threatened borders, absorbed with physical self-defense to a degree that would submerge all other interests and activities. The growth of a Jewish culture would cease to be the concern of the whole people; social experiments would have to be discarded as impractical luxuries; political thought would center around military strategy….

Under such circumstances… the Palestinian Jews would degenerate into one of those small warrior tribes about whose possibilities and importance history has amply informed us since the days of Sparta.

Arendt went on that Israel’s relations with world Jewry “would become problematical, since their defense interests might clash at any moment with those of other countries where large number of Jews lived.”

That hasn’t happened yet. American Jewish organizations have been only too happy to hold the bag for Israel. Well-placed Zionists such as Dennis Ross and Richard Perle speak at Washington think tanks about the need for Israel’s “defensible borders.”

But the support that Ilhan Omar is getting from progressives and young Jews suggests that the era of the Israel lobby is coming to an end. Because as she wrote in 1944, that long support “may turn out to be very troublesome indeed for Jews in this country.”

What Arendt’s prophecies demonstrate is that the question of Israel’s reliance on lobbies in the United States was a problem built into Zionism, and one that absolutely merits serious consideration by progressive Jews and foreign policy experts. For her critique was based on a worthy idea: Israel cannot continue to govern without the consent of those governed.

A serious consideration of these issues is exactly what Israel and its lobby don’t want. No wonder they are trying to run Omar off the road.

H/t James North, Adam Horowitz, Scott Roth, Ira Glunts.

Philip Weiss

Philip Weiss is senior editor of Mondoweiss.net and founded the site in 2005-06.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

41 Responses

  1. John O on March 5, 2019, 1:14 pm

    Really interesting. I’ll have to reread it a couple of times, not least because, as a Brit, I see some parallels with the lunacy of Brexit.

  2. echinococcus on March 5, 2019, 6:32 pm

    “Hannah Arendt would agree with Ilhan Omar”

    Who Ms Arendt agrees with is so irrelevant one could howl. Ms Omar’s courage is the touchstone now. Arendt’s agreement won’t stop the Dims from assassinating Omar.

  3. vanmet on March 5, 2019, 6:50 pm

    This is excellent, thanks. I guess it’s kind of a “sad commentary,” but Arendt’s shrewdness, the common-sense clarity of her writing, and the depth of her learning–these otherwise baseline qualities of what an educated, rounded citizen should be, make her stand out like a prophet, someone possessed of near supernatural insight. The reception of her Eichmann book back in the day is just more confirmation, if necessary.

    It’s OK to fall back on a who-do-you-admire? sort of measure, once in a while, as a kind of boost to morale when all else is so tiring. So, who else was critical of Zionism and its role in project Israel? Along with Arendt, there’s Yeshayahu Leibowitz, Martin Buber, Albert Einstein, among others also worthy of mention; and it needn’t be a list based on fame or otherwise nonrelated achievements, but you can just go to their plain statements based on the facts and issues. Who would you rather talk to for half an hour, if that wish could be granted? Who would have supported Ilhan Omar in all the noise of today?

  4. Keith on March 5, 2019, 7:01 pm

    PHIL- “Well, was Rep. Omar tapping into ancient stereotypes about Jews as a nation within a nation?”

    What stereotypes? Perhaps you should reread “The Jewish Century” by Yuri Slezkin. “Everyone (and most particularly the Jews themselves) assumed that the Jews were nonnative, temporary exiles….and that the country – however conceived – belonged to the local Apollonians.” (p106, “The Jewish Century,” Yuri Slezkine) In other words, Jews thought of themselves as part of an exile nation living within a community/nation of non-Jews. This was the essence of Classical Judaism.

    The enlightenment and liberalism freed the Jews to become part of the local community/nation, albeit with inevitable transitional friction and violence. Zionism is a retreat back to a secular, blood and soil version of Classical Judaism with Israel as the mythical homeland. Jews becoming assimilated into the liberal community, yet maintaining a strong Jewish kinship/tribal loyalty. To succeed, this kinship is emphasized among Zionist Jews while being downplayed/hidden from the surrounding community. That is the reality. And any non-Jew publicly stating this will be attacked as an anti-Semite.

    • YoniFalic on March 6, 2019, 8:49 am

      Slezkine knows neither Medieval thinking nor Jewish theology. In Medieval Europe there were two confessional nationals. (Konfession is still used in German.) These two nations were Christendom (Christentum) and Jewdom (Judentum, Jewdom was never really accepted into English although one can find instances of usage). The Medieval world did not so much have a sense of alien or native as much as it did a sense of caste or Estate. Jewdom had a well-defined caste as an untitled commercial-financial stratum within the 2nd Estate.

      In Jewish theology there really is not a physical exile, which was ended by Cyrus, but a theological alienation of from God. This alienation is expressed by means of the Biblical terminology of exile.

      On modernization Christendom split into many ethnic groups. Judentum fragmented into multiple ethnic groups as well. The two sets of ethnic groups were different. The two sets had no reason to be the same.

      The process of modern nationalism melds multiple ethnic groups into a single nation state. From Iberia to the Ukraine the process was difficult.

      Many people & groups began to feel in exile or alienated.

      Many Jews confused this feeling with the theology of alienation, but the real exile for E. European Jews was the collapse of Commonwealth Poland. The Jewish economic niche required European Jews to operate at the center of a major state or empire. Suddenly as Poland collapse, Jews without having moved were in the sticks of the Habsburg, Hohenzollern, and Romanoff Empires. That situation was their exile.

      Even worse the borders of modernizing states interfered with traditional Jewish financial-commercial networks, which did not owe loyalty to local sovereigns (hence untitled stratum of 2nd estate) and the modern states wanted to integrate Jews as equal citizens (hence no special Jewish commercial-financial niche).

      Von Treitschke & others, who understood it was hard for nation states to regulate the traditional Jewish pre-modern commercial-financial sector, criticized Jewish refusal to assimilate. Jews called them antisemites because Jews found themselves unable to maintain their traditionally higher incomes in the face of national levelling of citizens while the advantages Jews had in modernization (greater numeracy & literacy) made it difficult for states to guarantee equal access of all citizens to the professions (hence numeri clausi).

      There were many grounds for friction, and then the overthrow of Czarism scared everyone.

      Kazimierz Kelles-Krauz (a Polish Marxist sociologist and political thinker) developed a theory of retrospective revolution. Poles looked backward to a fairy tale of Commonwealth Poland. Jewish Zionist thinkes tried to transform a fairy tale concept of pre-modern Judenthum into a modern Jewish ethnonationality (people or Volk). Hitler (thanks to Eckart) tried to recreate pre-modern Christentum in a fairy tale of the Aryan race (Volk).

      Some of the intelligentsia considered this stuff to be complete crap, e.g., Luxemburg, Lenin, Trotsky, Kautsky.

      Kelles-Krauz seems to have had any important insight, but Luxemburg, who was a political enemy of Kelles-Krauz, was right in considering this type of revolutionary perspective extremely dangerous.

      • hophmi on March 6, 2019, 3:16 pm

        Why is YoniFalic, banned from Twitter for antisemitism, still on Mondoweiss? His comments are overtly antisemitic and all those who allow them are enabling overt antisemitism.

      • Talkback on March 6, 2019, 6:01 pm

        Hophmi: “Why is YoniFalic, banned from Twitter for antisemitism, still on Mondoweiss?”

        Either Israel doesn’t pressure Mondoweiss or Mondoweiss doesn’t allow to be pressured by Israel.

        Twitter Bows To Israeli Government Pressure To Censor Tweets
        https://www.mintpressnews.com/twitter-bows-israeli-government-pressure-censor-tweets/219460/

        Under Israeli pressure, Facebook and Twitter delete large amounts of Palestinian content
        https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20160609-under-israeli-pressure-facebook-and-twitter-delete-large-amounts-of-palestinian-content/

        Your beloved Apartheid state seems to be even more desperate than you after its Hasbara’s total collapse. All it does is calling for censorship and crying antisemitism. Well, besides killing children, eldery people, the disabled, medics and journalists … intentionally and with live ammunition.

        Hophmi: “His comments are overtly antisemitic and all those who allow them are enabling overt antisemitism.”

        If they are overlty antisemitic you won’t have a problem to provide a quote in which Yonifalic attacks Jews as such, as a people or collectively. I think that you are overtly lying.

      • Keith on March 6, 2019, 6:58 pm

        HOPHMI- “His comments are overtly antisemitic ….”

        Please indicate what is anti-Semitic about his comment which you responded to in your usual totalitarian fashion. How much financial support do provide Mondoweiss which you feel gives you the right to make these kind of demands?

      • Mooser on March 6, 2019, 7:29 pm

        ” His comments are overtly antisemitic and all those who allow them are enabling overt antisemitism.” “Hophmi”

        Behold the Lord High Ex-communicator!
        A personage of noble rank and title.
        A bal-toyreh and mashgiach,
        Whose functions are particularly spiteful.
        Defer, defer, to the Lord High Ex-Communicator!

      • RoHa on March 6, 2019, 8:18 pm

        “Why is YoniFalic, banned from Twitter for antisemitism, still on Mondoweiss?”

        Why should the editors of MW give a hoot about what Twitter does?

        Seriously, Hophmi, give it a rest. All you do is bang on about how this or that is anti-Semitic.

        If Israel’s actions are wrong, they are wrong regardless of whether or not I say so.

        And if Israel’s actions are wrong, and I do say so, they are wrong regardless of whether I say so as an expression of my exquisitely refined moral sensibility or I say so because I am a rabid anti-Semite.

        Deal with substantive issues, and leave out the smears.

    • Mooser on March 6, 2019, 11:57 am

      “This was the essence of Classical Judaism.”

      “Keith”, nobody digs that long-hair schmaltz these days.

      • Citizen on March 6, 2019, 4:03 pm

        What’s the butch cut?

      • Keith on March 6, 2019, 4:31 pm

        MOOSER- ““Keith”, nobody digs that long-hair schmaltz these days.”

        Au contraire. The appeal of mythological reality runs strong and deep.

  5. wondering jew on March 5, 2019, 11:42 pm

    I think a more accurate headline would be: “Hannah Arendt predicted Ilhan Omar”.

    I have recognized the problem of split loyalties for quite some time.

    Most American Jewish supporters of Israel of my generation do not agree that there is a problem. Most of them have never been to Israel, but were raised within spitting distance from the Holocaust and for most American Jews of my generation the line between the Holocaust and Israel is self evident. They don’t view it as a foreign country, so much as an expression of a rebellion against the disarmament that was part of the shit people say about the Jews, “why didn’t they fight? why did they go like lambs to the slaughter?” every american jew of my generation has heard that tons of times. and our answer is: “well, now we fight. you like us better now?”
    and that is the essence of my generation’s support for israel.

    • Stephen Shenfield on March 6, 2019, 8:29 am

      Quite a few did fight, of course. But the feeling that the victims of the Holocaust had not fought enough was crucial to the surge in Jewish support for Zionism everywhere, not only in the US. The feeling that we have not fought enough, we want to fight more, to take revenge and redeem our honor, was frustrated by the fact that the war was already over and the Nazi regime had already been defeated, mainly by non-Jews. There was a shortage of targets for the pent-up longing to do more by way of ‘fighting back’ and the ‘Arabs’ provided a convenient substitute.

      • Keith on March 6, 2019, 11:37 am

        STEPHEN SHENFIELD- ” There was a shortage of targets for the pent-up longing to do more by way of ‘fighting back’ and the ‘Arabs’ provided a convenient substitute.”

        Curious that this “pent-up longing” didn’t become truly significant until after the 1967 Six Day War.

        “Everything changed with the June 1967 Arab-Israeli war. By virtually all accounts, it was only after this conflict that The Holocaust became a fixture in American Jewish life.” (p16, “The Holocaust Industry,” Norman Finkelstein)

      • wondering jew on March 6, 2019, 4:18 pm

        Keith, Finkelstein’s knowledge of politics and history is way beyond mine. His knowledge of psychology would fit in a thimble and leave plenty of room. The reaction of the Jewish body politic certainly in the immediate aftermath of the war must include a heavy element of psychology for it to impress me as in any way valid. That you are quoting him, further discredits him.

      • Keith on March 6, 2019, 6:39 pm

        WONDERING JEW- “Keith, Finkelstein’s knowledge of politics and history is way beyond mine.”

        One of your few honest comments.

        WONDERING JEW- “His knowledge of psychology would fit in a thimble and leave plenty of room.”

        What an asinine comment. What leads you to believe that your knowledge of psychology compares favorably with Norman Finkelstein’s? Furthermore, what great psychological insight is required to see that the facts don’t fit your fanciful interpretation of reality? It seems to me rather obvious that your interpretation of events was in response to Zionist propaganda designed to elicit just such a response.

        WONDERING JEW- “That you are quoting him, further discredits him.”

        That you think so further discredits you, assuming that is even possible with your comment history.

      • RoHa on March 6, 2019, 8:44 pm

        “Quite a few did fight, of course. ”

        Jews outside Germany engaged in a bit of BDS as well.

    • Misterioso on March 6, 2019, 10:39 am

      @wondering Jew

      Meanwhile, in today’s world the Zionist edifice is crumbling. Hardly surprising. “You can fool some of the people all of the time and all of the people some of the time, but….”

      Here’s a recent example:
      https://electronicintifada.net/blogs/ali-abunimah/french-resist-effort-censor-criticism-zionism

      “French resist effort to censor criticism of Zionism” by Ali Abunimah, Electronic Intifada, March 4/19

      EXCERPT:
      “There is a pushback in France against President Emmanuel Macron’s speech to a major Israel lobby group last month vowing to criminalize anti-Zionism.

      “More than 400 intellectuals, artists and activists have signed an open letter to Macron that was published on 28 February in the national newspaper Libération.

      “’Mr. President, we are French citizens who respect the laws of the republic, but if you adopt a law against anti-Zionism, or if you officially adopt an erroneous definition of anti-Semitism that permits outlawing it, please know that we will break this law with our words, our writing, our art and our acts of solidarity,’ the letter states.

      “’And if you decide to pursue us, to silence us, even to imprison us for that, well, you can come and get us.’

      “Among the signatories are academics and educators Ariella Azoulay, Sonia Dayan-Herzbrun and Michèle Sibony; filmmakers Jean-Luc Godard, Simone Bitton and Eyal Sivan; writers Nancy Huston and Abdellatif Laabi; and veteran journalist Alain Gresh.

      “’Anti-Zionism is an opinion, a current of thought born among European Jews at the moment when Jewish nationalism was taking off. It opposes the Zionist ideology that advocated (and still advocates) the installation of the world’s Jews in Palestine, today Israel,’ the letter adds.

      “It notes that the essential argument of anti-Zionism is ‘that Palestine was never an empty territory that a ‘people without land’ are free to colonize based on a divine promise, but a country populated with real inhabitants for whom Zionism would soon become a synonym for exodus, despoilation and the negation of all their rights.’

      “During his speech to CRIF, a major Jewish communal organization and pro-Israel group, Macron claimed ‘anti-Zionism is one of the modern forms of anti-Semitism’ and pledged that France would formally adopt the so-called IHRA definition of anti-Semitism.

      “Supported by the Israel lobby, the definition deliberately conflates criticism of Israel and Zionism on the one hand, with hatred of Jews, on the other.”

      It never ceases to amaze me how out of touch you and your ilk are regarding the accelerating negative shift that is taking place around the world, including Jews everywhere, Americans and youth in general regarding “Israel.” Zionists of foreign origin have gotten away with murder, massacres, ethnic cleansing, and a multitude of well documented crimes against humanity for over 70 years committed against the indigenous Arab inhabitants of historic Palestine. The writing is on the wall. “As ye sow, so shall ye reap.”

      • Elizabeth Block on March 6, 2019, 1:09 pm

        Wow. I’m super-impressed – though not surprised! – by Hannah Arendt’s clarity of forethought and foresight. “Her critique was based on a worthy idea: Israel cannot continue to govern without the consent of those governed.” Yes.
        And wonderfully impressed by the French writers and activists who say, If you pass this law we shall disobey it. Don’t like that? Come and get us!
        Remember Barbara Tuchman’s “March of Folly”? The criteria for labelling a policy as folly include: It must have been seen at the time as foolish.

      • gamal on March 6, 2019, 3:43 pm

        “Barbara Tuchman’s “March of Folly”? ”

        I remember Tuchman mainly for her “that’s how things were done then” assessment of Zionism, was she not a Zionist fanatic? not sure if that’s relevant, all this witch hunting has me a bit digi, as we say.

        “Britain and Palestine in history: The racism of Barbara Tuchman

        You see Tuchman was a most fanatical Zionist ideologue and apologist for Empire. Her thesis was apparently titled The Moral Justification for the British Empire – but one does not need to know that to detect her love for European Empires practically glowing off every page of this book.

        The book is recommended, though with reservations, by Israeli historian Shlomo Sand, in his book The Invention of the Land of Israel (which I thoroughly enjoyed), a fascinating account of how the “Land of Israel” was transformed by Zionism from an metaphysical religious concept in Judaism (which in fact largely prohibited Jews from living in Palestine) to a concrete political justification for a project of colonization.

        Sand says that while the book is “one of the most fascinating and comprehensive studies ever undertaken on Britain’s role in the birth of Zionism” it suffers from the fatal flaw of “crude Orientalism, manifested in its complete blindness and indifference to the original inhabitants of Palestine” (page 145n).

        Sand is certainly correct. The Palestinians themselves are almost totally ignored in the book’s narrative. Their stories, wants, needs and desires are of no relevance to Tuchman. The only people who count are the agents and rulers of Empire. Foremost among these as far as she is concerned are the leaders and founders of Zionism, such as Herzl, Weizmann and their ideological forerunners”

        https://www.middleeastmonitor.com/20150117-britain-and-palestine-in-history-the-racism-of-barbara-tuchman/

      • wondering jew on March 6, 2019, 4:14 pm

        misterioso- One wonders if ever you were truly interested in communication of a two way sort whether that is within your capacity. One doubts it.

      • Mooser on March 6, 2019, 6:08 pm

        Gosh “Yonah” this is a sad situation. Do you think Mondoweiss will ever produce a commenter worthy of you?

      • Rashers2 on March 9, 2019, 9:06 pm

        In response to @Misterioso, I said, ‘Pondering why it was that some of the most powerful critics of Zionism and the colonial project in Palestine are and have been Jews like Hannah Arendt and why some prominent Jews were among those who foresaw before they materialised the dangers Zionism posed and poses to the Jewish community, I surmised that this was probably not a result of genius (which is not to denigrate e. g. Hannah Arendt’s intellectual stature) but simply of awareness and enlightened self-interest.’ I didn’t wish to imply that such prominent Jews as Hannah Arendt and Rt. Hon. Edwin Montagu opposed Zionism solely out of self-interest; there was a moral dimension, too, to their convictions for which I failed earlier to credit them.

    • Misterioso on March 6, 2019, 11:01 am

      @wondering Jew

      Two just released videos that further reveal the evil of Zionism and “Israel.”

      “U.N. Finds Israel Intentionally Shot Children, Journalists & the Disabled During Gaza Protests” | Democracy Now! March 4/19

      https://www.democracynow.org/2019/3/4/un_finds_israel_intentionally_shot_children

      Also, an interview with Norman Finkelstein.

      https://www.democracynow.org/2019/3/4/it_is_time_to_indict_israel

      • Talkback on March 6, 2019, 12:42 pm

        Great link (amongst your countless great links.)

        Imagine that Gantz becomes Israeli prime minister and the International Criminal Court indicts him. That would be awesome. LOL.

    • Keith on March 6, 2019, 11:21 am

      WONDERING JEW- “… the shit people say about the Jews, “why didn’t they fight? why did they go like lambs to the slaughter?”

      Who said this, Gentiles or Zionist Jews? And don’t forget that the great Jewish love affair with Israel began AFTER the 1967 war where Israel easily prevailed and proved it’s worth to empire, both militarily and ideologically.

      WONDERING JEW- “and that is the essence of my generation’s support for israel.”

      This is why you support the racist blood and soil nationalism of a foreign state? The only state which currently embodies this ideology?

      • Mooser on March 6, 2019, 11:51 am

        WONDERING JEW- “and that is the essence of my generation’s support for Israel.

        That’s right, he’s talking about his g-g-gen-generation. The generation which will live forever.

      • Elizabeth Block on March 6, 2019, 1:13 pm

        I have a theory, based on nothing, that Israel is admired because – not in spite of – its being strong, chauvinistic, and violent. And that started with the 1967 war.

      • YoniFalic on March 6, 2019, 3:10 pm

        I have the same impression. Israel has become a part of US white racist ideology.

        US white racists, who structurally encumbered blacks for a century, can say look at Israel and say the following.

        This people suffered genocide and yet bounced back from nothing. Stop whining about discrimination. Actually Jews were an elite population in Europe and in the pre-modern period had been de jure or de facto part of the pre-modern European 2nd Estate. In addition, the racist European colonial-settlers that stole Palestine from the natives did not experience the Holocaust directly except for a minority.

        Comparing Israeli colonial-settlers to freed slaves or oppressed blacks is like comparing restored French aristocracy after Napoleon or recovering southern planters planters after the Civil War to freed slaves or oppressed blacks.

        The white racist European colonial-settler population in Palestine was in fact well-funded from outside during the Mandatory and post-founding periods.

        US white racists can pretend they aren’t racists by claiming to stand against antisemitism. (It is not hard in US white racist ideology. Thomas Dixon, one of the founders of US white or Aryan nationalism, considered European Jews to be Aryans just as Jabotinsky did.)

        And finally, white racists admire what invading white racists (like my family) did to darker natives in Palestine. I suspect US white racists can take vicarious delight in the genocide of 47-8 as well as in the ongoing genocide. Israeli colonial-settlers do to the darkies there what white racists want to do to the darkies here.

        This feeling among white racists may have started in aftermath of 1967 War.

      • wondering jew on March 6, 2019, 4:21 pm

        KEITH- The Jewish worry about Israel began in earnest in May of 67. The immediate euphoria was a result of that worry. That worry reflected a delayed reaction to the slaughter of world war II. a slaughter that you enjoy minimizing.

      • Keith on March 6, 2019, 6:08 pm

        WONDERING JEW- “The Jewish worry about Israel began in earnest in May of 67.”

        After Israel won a rapid and resounding victory, THEN Jews began worrying in earnest? It is comments like this why you are not taken seriously.

        WONDERING JEW- “a slaughter that you enjoy minimizing.”

        When have I ever minimized the horrors of World War II? Got a quote, jerk? The fact that I place equal emphasis on the non-Jewish death toll is not anti-Semitic. That you don’t says volumes about you.

      • Keith on March 6, 2019, 6:21 pm

        YONI FALIC- “This people suffered genocide and yet bounced back from nothing. Stop whining about discrimination.”

        True enough, but it goes beyond that. By focusing on the Holocaust, the nations of European imperialism (including the US) can divert attention from the ongoing holocaust of Third World peoples which they are responsible for. One which is far greater than six million victims. And one, I might add, in which Jews participated and continue to participate as members of the imperial elite.

      • Sibiriak on March 6, 2019, 10:14 pm

        Keith: By focusing on the Holocaust, the nations of European imperialism (including the US) can divert attention from the ongoing holocaust of Third World peoples which they are responsible for.
        ——————————————————

        Excellent point. Quite profound.

    • Talkback on March 6, 2019, 12:46 pm

      “… that was part of the shit people say about the Jews, “why didn’t they fight? why did they go like lambs to the slaughter?””

      Some info about the people who said this “shit” about the Jews:
      “During the Holocaust, Abba Kovner and other Jewish resistance leaders used the phrase to exhort Jews to fight back. In postwar Israel, most Holocaust survivors were demonized as having gone “like sheep to the slaughter” while armed resistance was glorified. The phrase was taken to mean that Jews had not tried to save their own lives, and consequently were partly responsible for their own suffering and death.”
      https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Like_sheep_to_the_slaughter

    • Mooser on March 6, 2019, 4:48 pm

      “well, now we fight. you like us better now?” “WJ”

      Count on “Yonah” to turn the American Jewish experience into a cheap Kung-Fu movie with bad dubbing.

    • RoHa on March 6, 2019, 8:41 pm

      Yonah, as far as I can make out, your latest maunderings can be summed up as “Jews felt bad after the Holocaust. Israel made them feel good, even if it did do a few naughty things.”

      So

      bleedin’

      what?

      The evil of Zionism started long before the Holocaust, and continues to this very moment. Salving the hurt feelings of Jews just doesn’t justify – or even mitigate – one scrap of the evil committed.

  6. Kay24 on March 6, 2019, 2:25 am

    It is disappointing to see the Democrats fall in line with the zionists, and hear Chuck Schumer, AIPAC’s favorite politician, stand up in front of a mic and say what Rep. Omar said was “reprehensible”. Ideally it would have been great to see these shameless Democrats, stand up for their colleague, support her, and say what she has stated are well known facts, and that to criticize Israel is NOT anti-semitism, and that the Constitution is on her side. But, as expected, even the Dems have sold their souls to one of the most disliked nations in the world, that has control over our congress, politicians, leaders, media, and think tanks. It’s that anti-semitism card being played again.

  7. Rashers2 on March 9, 2019, 8:42 pm

    “Anti-Zionism is an opinion, a current of thought born among European Jews at the moment when Jewish nationalism was taking off. It opposes the Zionist ideology that advocated (and still advocates) the installation of the world’s Jews in Palestine, today Israel,” the French intellectuals’ letter to President Macron reads. I see that a number of the signatories are prominent Jews.

    Hasbara Central and the Israel apologists in the USA and elsewhere in the West have a problem with those who oppose of Zionism; or who simply oppose attempts to censor, intimidate or muzzle criticism of Zionism and of Israel; who are also Jews. Goyim like I who, in the course of our own criticisms of the Zionist ideology, of Israeli policy or of Israel’s latest in its litany of crimes against humanity, quote such Jewish thinkers, politicians and intellectuals are easier meat, of course, because we’re all fundamentally just anti-Semites who are weaponising the words of “rogue” Jewish critics of Zionism as “cover” for our anti-Semitism, thus pre-emptively defending our own Jew-hatred: “Look, it’s not just I who am thinking this: X, Y and Z also think it and they’re – shock, horror! – Jews.” Jewish anti-Zionists, on the other hand, need to be explained away in other terms, usually as “self-hating Jews”, “Kapos”, “Jinos” (Jews in name only), etc.

    Pondering why it was that some of the most powerful critics of Zionism and the colonial project in Palestine are and have been Jews like Hannah Arendt and why some prominent Jews were among those who foresaw before they materialised the dangers Zionism posed and poses to the Jewish community, I surmised that this was not a result of genius (which is not to denigrate e. g. Hannah Arendt’s intellectual stature) but simply of awareness and enlightened self-interest.

    Arendt’s observations quoted in the article above echo – although at greater length, arguably more eloquently and with the benefit of supervening observations – the thoughts some 30 years previously of an opponent of that most crucial of enabling betrayals, the Balfour Declaration. Commenting recently elsewhere on the latest of the Witchfinder-General’s inquisitions into senior members of the Parliamentary Labour Party in the UK for alleged anti-Semitism, I said, “An irony of the ‘mischievous political creed’ of Zionism was foreseen over a century ago by the only Jew in Lloyd-George’s Cabinet and the only Cabinet minister to oppose the Balfour Declaration: Zionism itself risks causing a rise of real anti-Semitism (as opposed to reflex accusations levelled at any and all advocates for Palestinian rights or critics of the obnoxious Jewish supremacism now embedded in Israeli society) in Europe. The insistence of the neo-Fascist Israeli right currently in the ascendant that Israel speaks for and represents global Jewry, not merely those who live in Israel, will cause “blowback” against Diaspora Jews who seek nothing more than to maintain their peaceable places within the societies to which they belong and [who] do not self-identify as mythic “Israelites in exile”. These innocents are at risk from Zionism because they are understandably likely to be conflated with those vocal Diaspora Jews like [name of recent Labour Party defector, Member for Enfield North (outer London)] who relentlessly shill for Israel, “right or wrong” and whom respected American commentator and ex-AIPAC staffer Mike Rosenberg described as “Israel-firsters”. Once-dead-and-buried suspicions of “divided loyalties” and “hidden agendas” may be revivified in the popular mind, fed and watered by similar tendentious and/or false media coverage as was deployed by such as the Harmsworth press during its infatuation with European totalitarianism [in the 1930s and] is today being used by the scions of those very same media barons against Islam, [which is] a factor fuelling the Islamophobia in Britain and elsewhere in Western Europe.”

  8. Jett Rucker on March 16, 2019, 10:39 pm

    I wonder if the fate of Israel (as a Jewish state) on its hundredth anniversary (2048) could be so perspicaciously predicted?

    Personally, I rather expect it will have been extinguished. I further anticipate most of the Jews now living there (or their descendants) will still be living there. But HUGE numbers of them (or their parents) will have emigrated (“been driven out” in their phrasing), probably most to the United States, and VAST claims will be made for their financial/material losses, along with the “death toll” they will claim their group sustained.

Leave a Reply