Trending Topics:

ADL official smears Beinart with Richard Spencer after he says Israel discriminates against non-Jews

Media Analysis
on 39 Comments

Over the past week, an ideological battle has been going on concerning the limits of discourse about Israel, between Deputy National Director of Anti-Defamation League Ken Jacobson, and ‘liberal-Zionist’ professor and columnist Peter Beinart. It has been taking place in the pages of the Forward.

It started with Beinart last week writing a piece titled “The Real Reason So Many Republicans Love Israel? Their Own White Supremacy”. Beinart began by pointing to the curiosity, that Israel has been mentioned so many times in conjunction with Trump’s racist rants against the four Congresswomen of color:

If you listened earlier this month to Republican responses to Donald Trump’s call for Ilhan Omar, Rashida Tlaib, Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez and Ayanna Pressley to “go back” to the “places from which they came,” you noticed something odd. Trump’s defenders kept mentioning Israel.

Beinart says that the reason for Israel being mentioned like this is that “Republicans no longer talk about Israel like it’s a foreign country”:

They conflate love of Israel with love of America because they see Israel as a model for what they want America to be: An ethnic democracy.

Beinart compares the Israeli “ethnic democracy” to what he says Trump and his allies want the US to be:

Israel is a Jewish state. Trump and many of his allies want America to be a white, Judeo-Christian state. Israel, despite its free elections and parliamentary institutions, structurally privileges one ethnic and religious group over others. That’s what many Republicans want here.

Jacobson was angered by Beinart’s suggestion of a racist nexus. His response was titled “Think Israel Is A White Supremacy? Congratulations: Richard Spencer Taught You Well”. 

Jacobson criticizes a “deep flaw in Beinart’s argument”, being “the idea that right-wing support for Israel is a product of Israel being a racist state – one that the right admires for that trait and aspires to impose here in America”. Jacobson chides Beinart for using that “euphemism”: “an ethnic democracy”, and charges that Beinart’s “intent is unmistakable” – that is, that he’s calling Israel a racist state, which the US would model.

For Jacobson, these suggestions are “delegitimization”, and by him, this is something that leads to “victimization of Jews”:

Make no mistake: Those who delegitimize the Jewish state bear some measure of responsibility when Jewish people are victimized by this irrational hatred as we have seen on many occasions in Europe and even here at home.

So Beinart is painted as an extremist on par with Richard Spencer:

Beinart associating Israel with the white nationalist right is the best way to deepen progressive antagonism to Israel. How ironic that Beinart and Richard Spencer end up in the same place in their view of the Jewish state.

This is a huge twisting of words and a direct offense to a reasonable commentator like Beinart. Agree with him or not (I disagree with him on a lot), he is light-years removed from Richard Spencer. Beinart made valid and strong arguments based on sound data. Now Jacobson is essentially calling him a Nazi, or, if you like, on par with them.

So Beinart responded with a piece titled “‘Delegitimizing Israel’ Is Code For Pointing Out Truths Israel Doesn’t Want To Admit”.

Here, Beinart points out that “ethnic democracy” and “racist” are “different”. Actually, this is one of those points I deeply disagree with Beinart about, so bear with me for a moment.

I point once again to the Falk and Tilley UN report on Israeli Apartheid, which considers Israel to be a “racial democracy”. That name is almost identical to Beinart’s, basically addressing the same issue. And the report relates to how this “racial democracy” veils Apartheid:

The first general policy of Israel has been one of demographic engineering, in order to establish and maintain an overwhelming Jewish majority in Israel. As in any racial democracy, such a majority allows the trappings of democracy — democratic elections, a strong legislature — without threatening any loss of hegemony by the dominant racial group. (p. 31) 

Ronit Lentin’s recent book “Traces of Racial Exception – Racializing Israeli Settler Colonialism” also places race front and center in the Israeli settler-colonialist paradigm.

Beinart is reserving the right to not consider Israel inherently and intrinsically racist, with the typical duality of ‘liberal-Zionist’ advocacy. Here it is:

Israel is a democracy inside its original, pre-1967 boundaries because it holds elections in which virtually everyone can vote. It’s an ethnic democracy because it has a special obligation to protect and represent one ethno-religious group: Jews. That means that, even inside the green line, where Palestinians (sometime called “Arab Israelis”) enjoy Israeli citizenship, they lack all the rights of Jews.

So, wait a minute – “everyone can vote” – except half the population under Israel’s control for over 52 years under the occupation. But even in what Beinart calls Israel’s “original, pre-1967 boundaries,” Palestinian citizens “lack all the rights of Jews”. So they’re not really equal even there. Beinart fleshes out the many contradictions:

“From its birth,” [Jacobson] declares, Israel has offered “full rights for its non-Jewish citizens.” Really? At its birth, Israel’s Palestinian citizens—but not its Jewish ones—lived under martial law. Israel lifted martial law in 1966, but it still legally privileges its Jewish citizens over its Palestinian ones in myriad ways. “Since Israel’s founding,” Haaretz has noted, “about 600 new Jewish communities have been established but not a single new Arab community has been built.” Israel’s immigration policy allows Jacobson and me to move there and gain citizenship on day one. By contrast, many Palestinians from the West Bank can’t move to Israel proper and gain Israeli citizenship even if they’re married to a Palestinian citizen from inside the green line. Israel also privileges Jews in its symbols: Its flag features a Star of David and its national anthem speaks about the “Jewish soul.” If Jacobson doesn’t think that makes Palestinian Israelis feel like second class citizens, I’d invite him to imagine how he’d feel if America’s national anthem spoke about the “Christian soul.”

And here I’m almost thinking, bingo, Beinart is seeing that this “ethnic democracy” has been discriminatory from “its birth.” Is he becoming an anti-Zionist?!

No, Beinart maintains that this is still “not racist”:

Does this mean Israel is “racist?” No. For starters, Jews aren’t a race. What it means is that there’s a genuine tension between the promise of “complete equality of social and political rights” in Israel’s declaration of independence and Israel’s special obligation as a Jewish state to protect and represent Jews.

This is now pedantic. Whether Jews are or are not a race is a question for racists; because race is not a fact, it’s an idea. Where it becomes a racist reality, is where it is essentially applied as a discriminatory notion, to give one group (call it “ethnic” if you like, Israel calls Jews a “nation”, it doesn’t really matter) over another group. The application is essentially racial, and it doesn’t really matter that Jews are of different ethnicities – the Israeli “Jewish nation” application is racial, involving examination of one’s ancestry to determine how Jewish it is. 

But back to the mainstream battle. Jacobson is putting even Beinart’s modest criticisms of the US-Israel nationalistic nexus beyond the pale. Even such ‘liberal-Zionist’ talk is equivalent to Richard Spencer.

And Beinart has to fight with one hand behind his back because despite his eloquence, he has to protect Israel, his “ethnic democracy”, from the suggestion of “racism”, and is offended by Jacobson’s suggestion that he’s calling Israel “racist”.

Though when referring to Republican supporters of Israel, Beinart does not seem to have a problem hitting the nail on its head. “It’s about race”, he writes in his latest response:

If democracy is the reason Republicans admire Israel, why do they want it to maintain its blatantly undemocratic rule of the West Bank, where the vast majority of people under Israeli control can’t vote for the government that controls their lives. Jacobson also says “evangelicals see the rebirth of Zionism as a fulfillment of G-d’s promises.” Yes, some white evangelicals support Israel for that reason. But black and Hispanic Christians—even black and Hispanic evangelical Christians—are much less supportive. Which is a pretty good clue that GOP support for Israel isn’t only about religion. It’s about race.

Bang! So why is it so hard, so complicated, to speak about Israel as being “about race”? Even if you think it might have started out nicely (which Beinart himself rejects), is there any question that it has at least become an utterly racist place? Did the Nation State law of last year not make it clear that national rights are exclusive to Jews in Israel, in case anyone was in doubt?

But I’m not here to put words in Beinart’s mouth – he speaks for himself. And the point of all this was, that he was trying to make a valid point on racist collusion. Even this moderate point was defied by the Anti-Defamation League Deputy Director, who was basically saying that it’s out of the question to even suggest anything that might open up that discussion. And he’s hinting that Peter Beinart is, unwittingly, abetting anti-Semites, by his “delegitimization”.

And that’s a very depressing reality.

I am waiting for the day when Peter Beinart will turn fully anti-Zionist, and offer Jacobson an unapologetic response.    

Jonathan Ofir

Israeli musician, conductor and blogger / writer based in Denmark.

Other posts by .


Posted In:

39 Responses

  1. gamal on August 7, 2019, 1:00 pm

    “And that’s a very depressing reality”

    A Lentin to the rescue, Alana this time writing in the guardian, the link is to the “dump the guardian” site, progressives smug yet forceful when things are going well for them cringing and dishonest when challenges arise, Jews are not a race is not pedantry it is dishonest and absurd and given that the victims are still being crushed just a little disgusting, they used to ask in South Africa during the Boer (Afrikaans for farmer a self description ) regime but where are all the lovely English South Africans with their famous liberal moderation, drunk by the pool firing up the barbie came the answer.

    “What the bid to unseat Josh Frydenberg reveals about white, self-defined progressives”
    Alana Lentin

    https://web.archive.org/web/20190807163504/https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/aug/07/what-the-bid-to-unseat-josh-frydenberg-reveals-about-white-self-defined-progressives

  2. Talkback on August 7, 2019, 3:49 pm

    Jonathan: “So, wait a minute – “everyone can vote” – except half the population under Israel’s control for over 52 years under the occupation.”

    And except every Nonjew Israel keeps expelled.

    • pabelmont on August 11, 2019, 9:16 pm

      Talkback — thanks for remembering the exiles.

      • Talkback on August 13, 2019, 5:11 am

        Well thank you, that’s the point everyone keeps forgetting and that Israel has been an Apartheid state from the get go. Majority ruling through expulsion which is just another way of segregating (denationalizing) and disenfranchising the native population.

        “International Convention on the Suppression and Punishment of the Crime of Apartheid,
        Article II

        For the purpose of the present Convention, the term ‘the crime of apartheid’, which shall include similar policies and practices of racial segregation and discrimination as practiced in southern Africa, shall apply to the following inhumane acts committed for the purpose of establishing and maintaining domination by one racial group of persons over any other racial group of persons and systematically oppressing them: […]

        Any legislative measures and other measures calculated to prevent a racial group or groups from participation in the political, social, economic and cultural life of the country and the deliberate creation of conditions preventing the full development of such a group or groups, in particular by denying to members of a racial group or groups basic human rights and freedoms, including […] THE RIGHT to leave and TO RETURN TO THEIR COUNTRY, THE RIGHT TO A NATIONALITY, […]”
        https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Crime_of_apartheid

  3. Brewer on August 7, 2019, 5:38 pm

    “Those who delegitimize the Jewish state bear some measure of responsibility when Jewish people are victimized by this irrational hatred ”

    Interesting how often the term “irrational” comes up in diatribes of this sort.
    Of course if one denies the well documented massacres, land theft and ongoing illegal house demolitions and killings, it becomes necessary to portray any resistance as “irrational hatred”.
    Denial is essential even though the facts are well known, for any admission would raise the horrible (to the settler-colonists) prospect of compensation or return.
    Despicable really.

    • Talkback on August 7, 2019, 8:10 pm

      Of course if one denies the well documented massacres, land theft and ongoing illegal house demolitions and killings, it becomes necessary to portray any hatred as “irrational”.

      • pabelmont on August 11, 2019, 9:22 pm

        Talkback and others: the viciousness of the AIPAC, ADL, etc., is in conflating “rational” disapproval of Israel or its actions with “irrational” hatred of Jews as a whole group.

        They seem to say — at best — that even truthful exposition about I/P endangers Jews worldwide because (I guess) the ignorant readers of the truthful exposition about I/P will think that Israel’s Jews are the equivalent of “all Jews” (BTW as AIPAC, ADL, and Israel never tire of suggesting). And instead of demanding that Israel correct its behavior so that truthful exposition will no longer be so harmful, they ask everyone else to stop truthfully expositing. Jeez Louise!

      • echinococcus on August 12, 2019, 8:32 am

        “They seem to say — at best — that even truthful exposition about I/P endangers Jews worldwide because (I guess) the ignorant readers of the truthful exposition about I/P will think that Israel’s Jews are the equivalent of “all Jews” (BTW as AIPAC, ADL, and Israel never tire of suggesting)”

        They’re now going one step further in viciousness: using the word “Zionists” to accurately identify the invaders in Palestine and the Jewish majority that works for them in the rest of the world has now also been defined as “Antisemitism”.

      • Talkback on August 13, 2019, 5:01 am

        @ Pabelmont

        That’s the Zionist way of taking “the Jews” as human shields. Let them take the bullets of anti Israel criticism.

  4. JWalters on August 7, 2019, 8:29 pm

    Jacobson’s title is an evasion. Not an impressive start.

    His case – “delegitimizing” Israel victimizes Jews. This is an evasive way of saying “calling out Israel’s crimes” victimizes Jews, as Beinart points out. His roundabout wording helps hide its absurdity. It is literally an Alice In Wonderland level of absurdity. But he says it brazenly with a straight face.

    Beinart was, it seems to me, unfortunately fed a fantasy from childhood by some calculating war profiteers and their useful dupes.

  5. Another Dave on August 8, 2019, 7:30 am

    I’ve dropped the word ‘racism’ to describe what I see in Israel. I don’t think it’s really about the ‘race’ (an artificial concept, we’re one species not a collection of races or breeds), it’s more to do with the religion.

    It’s just old fashioned religious bigotry. They’re not members of ‘our’ group, so ‘they’ don’t matter.

    In the end, there’s not much difference in the underlying concept. So really, my comment is pointless.

  6. eljay on August 8, 2019, 8:52 am

    Jacobson: … Make no mistake: Those who delegitimize the Jewish state bear some measure of responsibility when Jewish people are victimized by this irrational hatred as we have seen on many occasions in Europe and even here at home.

    Make no mistake: Those who routinely, deliberately and anti-Semitically conflate Zionism and it’s colonialist, (war) criminal and religion-supremacist “Jewish State” construct with all Jews bear an even greater measure of responsibility when Jews are victimized.

    Why, I continue to wonder, do Zionists insist on hating Jews so much?!

    Beinart: … Does this mean Israel is “racist?” No. … What it means is that there’s a genuine tension between the promise of “complete equality of social and political rights” in Israel’s declaration of independence and Israel’s special obligation as a Jewish state to protect and represent Jews.

    You’re right, Pete: It’s just crazy weird how a state that was conceived as a religion-supremacist state, was established as a religion-supremacist state and which for ~70 years has operated deliberately and unapologetically as a religion-supremacist state experiences “genuine tension” with the  *wink-wink*  “promise of complete equality”.

    • eljay on August 8, 2019, 9:24 am

      || eljay: … Zionism and it’s… ||

      Correction: … Zionism and its …

      (Please, RoHa, don’t hurt ‘im!)

      • RoHa on August 9, 2019, 2:06 am

        You corrected yourself, so you are forgiven.

  7. Misterioso on August 8, 2019, 9:52 am

    Not on topic, but a must read:

    https://www.thenation.com/article/israel-occupation-palestine-housing-east-jerusalem/

    “The Meaning of Israel’s Massive Housing Demolitions in East Jerusalem” The Nation, by Jeff Halper, August 6/19

    “Destruction at this scale and visibility cannot be understood without grasping its political message; in fact, the scale and visibility are the message.”

    EXCERPT:
    “The act itself wasn’t unusual. Israeli demolition of Palestinian homes is a routine, almost daily occurrence. What set it apart was the scale, the impunity, and the political implications.

    “On July 22, the Israeli Civil Administration—that’s the Orwellian term Israel uses for its military government in the Occupied Palestinian Territory (OPT)—deployed 900 IDF soldiers and Border Police to demolish 13 apartment blocks, evicting 17 people in 70 apartments that were slated to house hundreds more in the Palestinian neighborhood of Wadi al-Hummus, to the southeast of Jerusalem.

    “The action in July had all the elements of the slow-moving but relentless process of demolition that has plagued Palestinian life in both the OPT and within Israeli itself these past seven decades: Israel’s use of zoning, planning, law, and a Kafkaesque bureaucracy as mechanisms for taking all the Palestinian land available for the natural expansion of their towns, cities, and villages, while freezing Palestinian building in 1948, in the case of Israel, and 1967, in the OPT; Palestinians expending great financial resources they do not have in lengthy but ultimately futile appeals to the courts; the inevitable demolition of homes in violent military and police operations that leave whole families (whose only crime is wanting decent housing on land they own) physically bruised, often arrested and fined heavily, psychologically traumatized, and financially ruined—then watching helplessly as homes for Jews served by modern roads and infrastructures arise on those very lands they once owned and cultivated, lands that represented a decent future life for them and their children.

    “And as in 99 percent of the approximately 140,000 Palestinian homes systematically demolished since 1948—52,000 in the Nakba and in its wake, 55,000 in the OPT since 1967, tens of thousands more within Israel from after the Nakba until today (for which we cannot get reliable figures)—the demolitions in Wadi al-Hummus had nothing to do with security, or legality. The story, much of it related by Amir Cheshin and Avi Melamed, both advisers on Arab affairs to former Jerusalem mayor Teddy Kollek, and Bill Hutman in their book Separate and Unequal: The Inside Story of Israeli Rule in East Jerusalem is, briefly, this:

    “In 1967, Israel created a greatly expanded ‘east’ Jerusalem out of lands taken from 28 Palestinian towns and villages in the West Bank that were conquered from Jordan. Although the new ‘east’ Jerusalem was 10 times larger than it had previously been, the idea was that the vast lands now incorporated into Jerusalem would be for exclusive Jewish use in order to ‘Judaize’ the city, not to serve the needs of their Palestinian owners, or even remain for long in their hands. The Israeli planning authorities drew tight lines around the already built-up Palestinian neighborhoods and villages, declaring all the unbuilt-upon land, which had been used for agriculture or grazing and represented the only space into which the future Palestinian population could expand, ‘open green space.’ This meant that Palestinians could own the land but not build upon it, since it was reserved for future urban development—i.e., future Jewish development. And the land, thus left unused, could easily be expropriated for Jewish settlement.

    “Today, when Palestinians make up almost 40 percent of the Jerusalem population, they still have access to only 8 percent of the urban land—and even there, they are routinely denied building permits. Lacking land, Palestinian ‘villages’ in Jerusalem have become apartment blocks of five-to-10-story buildings jammed tightly together, with no green space, no infrastructure, no parking, no planning, and with whole families crammed into suffocating conditions. According to the draconian ‘Potential Housing Construction’ policy adopted by the Israeli government and the Jerusalem Municipality, intended to maintain a 72-28 percent majority of Jews over Arabs in the city and to limit Palestinian construction to the already built-upon 8 percent, Arabs would be permitted to construct only tiny apartments in high-rise blocks on existing housing.

    “However, even this restrictive policy was resisted by the (all-Jewish) Jerusalem city council and the interior ministry. They therefore invented an Orwellian reason to justify why such building was not good for the Palestinians themselves: It would destroy the ‘village character’ of their neighborhoods. Thus mixing racist urban policy, the political use of zoning, and legal authority to restrict Palestinian construction by withholding building permits and demolishing homes built ‘illegally,’ Israel effectively pursued apartheid under the guise of ‘proper administration.” And it did so while promoting itself as ‘the only democracy in the Middle East.'”

  8. Elizabeth Block on August 8, 2019, 12:16 pm

    “I am waiting for the day when Peter Beinart will turn fully anti-Zionist.”
    Me too! He’s come quite a long way. He may yet go all the way.

    As for the claim that critics of Israel put Jews in danger – It’s Israel’s actions, and its claim to represent all Jews in the world, that puts Jews in danger. Gimme a break.

  9. Lillian Rosengarten on August 8, 2019, 12:17 pm

    Oh Peter Beinhart, when are you finally able to say that you are an anti-Zionist. Then I will truly respect you.

    • echinococcus on August 9, 2019, 4:49 am

      Pish tush. Beinart, a liberal, is a “liberal Zionist” because that is much more effective than the current openly reactionary Zionist policy. You can perform theft, invasion and genocide much better and more effectively when one accepts you as a Western “liberal”.

  10. DaBakr on August 9, 2019, 1:05 am

    Ashkenazi jews are no more ‘white’ then any mizrahi, Sephardic, North African, Syrian, or Persian or other west Asian descendants. The lie of White supremacy in regard to jews and zionism is a racist ploy by zionist-hating agitators that congregate on official hate sites like MW

    • annie on August 13, 2019, 1:22 pm

      Ashkenazi jews are no more ‘white’ then any mizrahi, Sephardic, North African, Syrian, or Persian or other west Asian descendants.

      nothing a little stop over in europe for a millennium or so won’t solve.

      • DaBakr on August 13, 2019, 4:35 pm

        people of colour have been ‘passing’ for centuries

      • Keith on August 13, 2019, 7:44 pm

        DABAKR- “people of colour have been ‘passing’ for centuries”

        The notion that Ashkenazi Jews are physically people of color is so outrageous that one must question your motivation in making the claim. An irrational obsession with (gilded) victimhood? Or are you just trolling for a response?

      • RoHa on August 13, 2019, 10:47 pm

        “people of colour have been ‘passing’ for centuries”

        If you are so pale that white people think you are white, and your parents were similarly pale, and your grand parents were similarly pale, and your great-grandparents similarly pale, and so forth, how can it make any sense to say that you are not white?

      • annie on August 13, 2019, 10:55 pm

        now keith, you don’t think jennifer anniston is a person of color? pleeease. the mere thought of michael oren being white, shiver me timbers, he reeks of color. there’s no way it could be aftershave. gwyneth paltrow, only on her dad’s side. besides, who said blue eyes and blond hair aren’t colorful.

      • DaBakr on August 14, 2019, 12:22 am

        So, the former scientific definition of the three main groups of humans as : negroid, mongoloid and caucasoid means nothing to you as it would place north Africans, Syrians and Persians in the same catagory as polish or Spanish. What’s your scientific basis for caucasion? You can’t have it both ways. Either Hispanic conquistadors are as white as Germans and Arabs or your making up your own personal definition of race and socalled ‘colour’. Colour is a misguided joke. Evidently, you ascribe to it. Unless you define colour as political, a foolish notion. Is this trolling or is it hypocrisy

        In today’s political climate your identification as a particular colour is totally fluid, and racist, as per Linda Sarsour.

      • annie on August 14, 2019, 12:50 pm

        i recommend: (pdf) https://jfrej.org/wp-content/uploads/2018/04/JFREJ-Understanding-Antisemitism-November-2017-v1-3-2.pdf

        Like the Irish and Italians, light-skinned Jews of European descent once faced pervasive, racialized bigotry. Today they primarily identify as white and are read as white, benefit from white privilege, and participate in upholding the system of white supremacy. However, this whiteness is contextual and conditional. While white supremacy may have embraced Jews of European descent in the last century, white supremacists have never considered any Jews to be white…
        ….

        In the U.S. today, white Ashkenazi Jews sometimes assert that they are not white because they are oppressed by other white people. Race is inherently fluid, nuanced and irrational and there is much to learn by probing and interrogating how Jews of European descent are racialized today. However, the authors believe that white Jews do experience white access and privilege, and that their claims arise from conflating the workings of antisemitism with the workings of racism, specifically anti-Black racism. What these white Jews are really saying is that they are not Christian white people. But being targeted by one oppression doesn’t negate being privileged by, complicit in, or acting as a perpetrator of another. White Ashkenazi Jewish racialization could change in the future, but in the here and now, such claims undermine the work of Jews of Color including Mizrahim to challenge white supremacy within Jewish communities.

      • Sibiriak on August 14, 2019, 12:58 pm

        ….the work of Jews of Color including Mizrahim to challenge white supremacy within Jewish communities.
        ———————————————–

        “Jews of Color” in Israel ought to challenge Jewish supremacy and Jewish oppression of Palestinians. It’s not happening (rare exceptions aside). It won’t happen any time soon It’s getting worse.

      • Mooser on August 14, 2019, 1:11 pm

        “scientific definition of the three main groups of humans as : negroid, mongoloid and caucasoid” “Dabakr”

        This is getting ridiculous. This is the Twenty-First-and-a-Fifth Century. We have science to replace racial nonsense!
        Certainly, a simple test for Jewish genes, and their percentage in a person, should settle the question of who is, or is not Jewish, and how much.

      • Sibiriak on August 14, 2019, 2:30 pm

        From Annie’s link:

        The stakes have never been higher, but neither have the possibilities for transformational change. Antisemitism is real. We need to sharpen our analysis in order to more accurately identify it, and deepen our resolve to wrestle with it. There is no better time than the present for all of us on the left — Jews and non-Jews — to start tackling it together.
        —————————————–

        Keith, you on board? :-)

      • edwardm on August 14, 2019, 6:33 pm

        “An irrational obsession with (gilded) victimhood.”
        NAILED IT.

        “So, the former scientific definition of the three main groups of humans as : negroid, mongoloid and caucasoid means nothing to you”…

        correct. The terminology of “Caucasoid”, “Mongoloid”, “Negroid” have also been criticized more generally as harking back to anthropological classifications unduly based on typology alone. Oh, and especially as CS Coon is largely associated with segregation. I can see why you might like him but his theories aren’t all that sound.

      • Keith on August 14, 2019, 8:50 pm

        SIBIRIAK- “Keith, you on board? :-)”

        Interestingly, someone actually emailed this “analysis” to me soliciting my opinion. I responded that I found it to be a fairly typical Judeocentric apologia and anti-Gentile mangling of historical reality. The person responded with considerable invective, essentially calling me an anti-Semite. I terminated all communication immediately. I have yet to see any empirical data to support the notion that anti-Semitism is a significant problem. Yet, it seems to be a principle concern of most (all?) groups that self identify as “Jews for whatever.” Why would Jews for Racial and Economic Justice focus on anti-Semitism? Jews, as a group, appear to be doing quite nicely. And do we really need yet another Judeocentric grouping of Jews? Jews for Racial and Economic Justice SOUNDS progressive, but how progressive can tribalism be in reality? More gilded victimhood?

      • Mooser on August 15, 2019, 4:49 pm

        You want significant anti-semitism? What about this!

      • Talkback on August 16, 2019, 6:37 am

        @ Mooser

        What was antisemitic about this incident? They were not targeted because they are Jews.

      • Keith on August 16, 2019, 1:19 pm

        TALKBACK- “They were not targeted because they are Jews.”

        It would appear that they were not targeted at all. The driver was a guard at the facility apparently trying to get in or out of the parking lot they were blocking. He drove slowly. They got out of the way. It appears that no one got hit. No apparent injuries.

    • RoHa on August 13, 2019, 11:09 pm

      Incidentally, what makes MW an “official” hate site? What person or organization designated it as such?

      The Queen? The Aikikai? The International Cricket Council? The RSPCA?

      If none of the above, I doubt that it really is “official”.

      • DaBakr on August 15, 2019, 7:17 am

        @rh

        As official as e.g, the UN or the ICC. The point exactly.

      • RoHa on August 15, 2019, 11:05 pm

        So you are saying that MW isn’t an official hate site after all?

        But the ICC is very official. You can read about it here.

        https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/International_Cricket_Council

      • Talkback on August 16, 2019, 6:35 am

        RoHa: “Incidentally, what makes MW an “official” hate site? What person or organization designated it as such?”

        This won’t be the last time that DaBakr will fail to provide a rational answer. It just happens in his brain and he can’t even recognize it.

  11. pabelmont on August 11, 2019, 9:14 pm

    Beinart must argue with one arm tied behind his back — because he loves Israel (or some infantile or dream-like idea of Israel) BUT ALSO because he wants this conversation to appear in the pages of the FORWARD.

    I think Jews are smart enough to read what he says had see through the subterfuge — if they want to. And otherwise, it doesn’t much matter.

Leave a Reply