Someone called my attention to this picture of pro-Palestinian protestors at an Israel Day Parade in 2009:
This is sickening. There is not only a sign showing predatory rabbis gloating over an Aryan-looking child (conjuring up der Stürmer-like images of blood libel), but also one asking God to nuke Israel. Worst of all, there’s a sign calling for the closing of Guantanamo prison and—the bad part—the re-opening of Auschwitz.
Let me first say that while I decry these protestors as rabid and stupid anti-Semites, I strongly defend their right to publicly parade their lunacy and hatred. I also decry the failure of the Obama administration to close Guantanamo. It’s morally unconscionable to hold prisoners for years without trial, or without informing them of their supposed crimes. These people should be on mainland U.S. soil, subject to U.S. criminal laws.
That said, it is indefensible to equate Guantanamo Bay with Auschwitz. People are not gassed or shot in droves on Guantanamo. They are not slowly starved to death or made to stand for three hours in the snow for roll call. They are not made to do day-long, backbreaking work on a cup of thin soup and a crust of bread. They get medical treatment. They are not killed upon arrival. The prison is not part of a concerted effort to exterminate all Muslims.
It is curious that those people who deny that the Holocaust ever happened still invoke it when it’s politically expedient to do so.
What kind of a sick mind would call for the re-opening of Auschwitz, except for one that truly wants the Jews wiped off the face of the Earth—as do many Muslims?
We hear much about Islamophobia (and I abhor a general hatred of Muslims, though I approve the denigration of Islam), but hear almost nothing about “Jewish-ophobia,” also known as anti-Semitism—a view widespread in the Middle East and publicly exhibited in its state-run newspapers and television. Indeed, I claim that anti-Semitism also plays some role in Western liberals’ public disapproval of Israel. After all, the Gaza strip has often been compared to the Warsaw Ghetto. That shows a complete failure of perspective.
I will in fact be visiting Auschwitz in a week, and will report on my experiences. I don’t expect it to be a pleasant trip, but for me it’s a necessary one. And just to remind people of the difference between Guantanamo (or Palestine) and what happened in Nazi Germany, here is a photograph that my host, Malgorzata, showed me. Taken in 1914, it shows her ancestors, including her mother:
In the center, holding the second-youngest daughter among his ten children, is Mordechai Wahrzager (“truth-sayer” in Yiddish), Malgorzata’s grandfather. Mordechai was born in 1878, so he would have been 36 at the time. His youngest daughter, Malgorzata’s mother Anna, is in the arms of Mordechai’s wife Chana, to his left. The third-youngest daughter stands in front on the left. To Mordechai’s right sits his sister, who moved to the U.S. before World War II. Her descendants are still in America.
The family lived in Turka nad Stryjem, formerly in Poland but now in the Ukraine.
Mordechai and his family were poor; he made his living by making thin wooden boxes for holding shoe polish. In the evenings the entire family would sit around and assemble these boxes. Despite his poverty and menial work, Mordechai was educated: he spoke fluent German and translated German poetry, including Goethe, from German into Yiddish. He also helped the largely illiterate non-Jews of his village in their dealings with the authorities.
The three youngest daughters, who were by then grown, were taken by the Soviets and relocated to Kyrgystan in Russia in 1940 (Russian policy was to subdue the Polish population by removing its educated classes). They survived and returned to Poland after the war.
By 1941, the nonagression pact between Stalin and Hitler had been broken, and the Germans took over all of Poland. When the Germans came to Turka nad Stryjem, Mordechai’s non-Jewish neighbors, whom he had helped, offered to hide him and the family from the Nazis. He refused, claiming that a country that had such culture, that had produced people like Goethe and Schiller, could never be so barbarous as to kill the Jews.
He was wrong. Mordechai, his wife, and his remaining seven children were captured in 1941 and sent to the Lager, probably the Majdanek concentration camp. None of them survived. Killed along with them were 45 other relatives: the future spouses and children of the youngsters shown in this picture.
Majdanek is one of three concentration camps that retain their original gas chambers. Here are views of the outside and inside of the killing room at Majdanek. The first picture shows the outside: real showers to the left, gas chamber to the right:
Inside the gas chamber: the “Prussian blue” color on the wall comes from the hydrogen cyanide gas:
As Wikipedia notes:
The camp, which operated from October 1, 1941 until July 22, 1944, was captured nearly intact, because the advance of the Soviet Red Army prevented the SS from destroying most of its infrastructure; but also, due to ineptitude of commandant Anton Thernes who failed his task of removing incriminating evidence on himself. Majdanek, also known as KL Lublin, remains the best preserved Nazi concentration camp of the Holocaust.
Here is the Majdanek crematorium: the wooden surrounding walls are rebuilt, but the interior and chimney are original:
Estimates of the number of people exterminated at Majdanek vary; the lowest estimate is 80,000, with 60,000 of these being Jews.
Those who compare Guantanamo or Gaza to Nazi concentration camps should be mindful of the very real differences between these. And calling for the re-opening of Auschwitz brands you as someone who doesn’t belong in civilized society.
It also behooves us to remember that something like Auschwitz could return if people like those brandishing the signs above ever get political power.
Yes.
I’m appalled. We have been taught the odious history, and the downside of freedom of speech, is that our sensibilities will be assaulted. Wilful ignorance makes me cringe and even cry.
I’m not sure I understand that comment.
Thankfully, not all Palestinians are anti-Semites and work with Israelis who militate against the occupation and mistreatment of the Palestinians by Israel. The photo in your article here is indeed profoundly disturbing but by far not representative of all Palestinians. Note that the Warsaw Ghetto was not a Nazi camp, and at times the Gaza Strip was not unlike it as Israel blocked the importation of food and other vital goods for months on end. In the Strip, many children died of malnutrition in those periods.
My mother was one of the translators and interpreters at the Nüremberg Trials. Matrilineally, we are Jews too although converted to Christianity several generations ago through marriage. We hold dear our Jewish heritage, so my mother’s two years as translator and interpreter at the Nüremberg Trials are deeply significant to us.
One should understand the difference between anti-Semitism and anti-Zionism, even if a minority of anti-Zionists are also anti-Semitics. A large proportion of Jews around the world are anti-Zionists. Zionism is not really connected to religion.
Here is an interesting YouTube video about the creation of modern Zionism by Theodore (a totally non-Jewish first name) Herzl. Be prepared to be quite surprised: watch?v=Gmq3LnG9ULM
I have recently been working with a group of young people from Israel, some of the Jewish, some Palestinian. They came here together to take part in a joint PhD training programme involving Polish and Israeli universities. They were equally bright, equally nice, and equally civilised, no matter what their ethnic or background. In fact you couldn’t tell their “tribal” identity unless you knew their names. It was their first time in Poland, so they were a little nervous at first, but then relaxed completely. They got on very well with each other and with their Polish instructors. Why the bloody hell can’t the rest of humanity at least try to be like them?
ethnic or background
Self-correction: I mean just “ethnic background”.
It’ll be interesting to see if the leaders have learned anything and are genuinely ready to negotiate.
Fingers crossed although my confidence in politicians isn’t exactly stellar.
Probably because the biggest a-holes always wind up with all the power.
I’ve had a number of conversations with Isrealis and Palestinians who insist that in practice, in daily life, for the most part Arabs and Jews live side by side in peace and go about their business. I think it is the minority of extremists on both sides and the leaders vying for power who keep the flames lit.
I think a quick look at Wikipedia would show you the difference between Warsaw Ghetto and Gaza. Daily ration for a Jew in that ghetto was 184 calories. Israel never stopped supplying Gaza with necessary food. For a time the amount was limited, but it was never even close to this “death ration” for Jews. A baby in Gaza has a life expectancy of over 70 years. A baby in Warsaw Ghetto had just a few month to live, at the most three years (until the killing of all Ghetto residents and demolishing of the Ghetto in 1943). The whole population of Warsaw Ghetto (with the exception of a few escapees) was killed. The population of Gaza has been growing rapidly all the time. Take a look at those pictures of children from Gaza: http://elderofziyon.blogspot.com/2013/07/the-suffering-children-of-gaza-2013.html#.Uisz-n8bSSo (and there are plenty of such pictures and places in Gaza) and compare them to pictures from Warsaw Ghetto.
And a short note: a Zionist is a person who thinks that Jews are as entitled to their own state as any other nation on Earth and are also entitled to defend themselves. An anti-Zionist is a person who thinks that Israel as a Jewish state should disappear and that Jews should again live on mercy of majority populations around them, which through centuries led to persecution (in Muslim countries as well as in Christian Europe) which culminated in the Holocaust. Personally I do not see much difference between an antisemite and ani-Zionist. The only difference I can see is that antisemite says that Hitler’s handiwork was not so bad, while an anti-Zionist is crying over the fate of six million dead Jews but doesn’t give a damn what will happen to Jews living today if Israel disappears.
I am a Zionist in that I support the existence and continued thriving of the state of Israel.
I’m not a Zionist that believes ownership of Judea and Samaria are part of Israel’s divine destiny.
There are different flavors of Zionism, including Revisionist Zionism, Reform Zionism, and Liberal Zionism.
Revisionist Zionism, the Zionism of the Likud party, is the form I oppose: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Revisionist_Zionism
Really? The Gaza strip was “not unlike the Warsaw ghetto”? I think you’d better read about the Warsaw ghetto before you make such a statement, and it would be nice if you’d admit your error.
Have a look at these, too:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/File:Childwarsawghetto.jpg
http://rawpoet.files.wordpress.com/2010/03/warschauergetto.jpg
http://demons.swallowthesky.org/post/14314740685
http://www.vilnaghetto.com/gallery2/d/10869-2/Warsaw_ghetto_002.jpg
Vierotchka
You are plainly lying. The Gaza strip has never been even remotely close to the Warsaw Ghetto. Arab population in Gaza city has been always on the rise, from 32,000 in 1945 to 450,000 in 2009 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza#Population). Food has never been blocked by the Israeli authorities.
How dare you compare Warsaw ghetto to Gaza? The Jewish population in the ghetto was entirely annihilated in less than 5 years.
Shame on you.
You are wrong on the other matters as well. Most, if not all, Jewish people I know, and they are not so few are Israel supporters. This does not mean they support all Israel policies, but that they identify the state of Israel as the Jewish homeland. There is a very tiny minority of anti-Israel Jews, they all belong to ultra-radical religion sects: either the ultra-orthodox Neturei-Karta and Satmer or the communists of many brands.
Ben,
You can make your point without accusing a fellow commenter of lying. Please apologize for that.
I am sorry, I apologize to you, but not to vierotchka because he/she lied when he/she said that Gaza is like the Warsaw Ghetto.
This is antisemitic propaganda of the worst kind, because gullible people tend to believe in it.
So the one I think needs to apologize is vierotchka.
Well, remember that when somebody says something that’s untrue, it might be due not to lying (which is saying something you KNOW) is untrue, but to ignorance of the facts. I’d give people the benefit of the doubt. I do, however, think that equating Gaza with the Warsaw Ghetto would evince some pretty severe ignorance, because making such a statement implies that one knows something about the facts.
Fair enough. I have to agree with you that in most cases people ignorance should be taken into account. In many other cases, I would have no problem arguing with people holding false beliefs or defending facts not based on good evidence. Being not the pope, we’re all fallible 😉 myself included.
My red line is racism and bigotry. Toleration ends with racists and bigots, who always act in bad faith.
Vierotchka
You are lying. The Gaza strip has never been even remotely close to the Warsaw Ghetto. Arab population in Gaza city has been always on the rise, from 32,000 in 1945 to 450,000 in 2009 (http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Gaza#Population). Food has never been blocked by the Israeli authorities.
How dare you compare Warsaw ghetto to Gaza? The Jewish population in the ghetto was entirely annihilated in less than 5 years.
Shame on you.
You are wrong on the other matters as well. Most, if not all, Jewish people I know, and they are not so few are Israel supporters. This does not mean they support all Israel policies, but that they identify the state of Israel as the Jewish homeland. There is a very tiny minority of anti-Israel Jews, they all belong to ultra-radical religion sects: either the ultra-orthodox Neturei-Karta and Satmer or the communists of many brands.
The most notable thing about this picture is that this kind of thing can only bring out two demonstrators…in 2009. People who hate anti-Semitism should find great satisfaction that weit has to go back four years to show how unpopular this kind of thinking is.
As to lies about food in Gaza, I’m afraid that I’m smelling some equivocation. As I remember, Israel refuses to allow materials to repair sanitation, and as a result water quality is terrible. This may not be counted as literally cutting off food, but the significance should not be discounted. (Checked my memory at Wikipedia which confirms it.)
Another form of food import is fish, of course. Fron wikipedia:
“The sea blockade has caused damage to Gaza fishing industry. Palestinian fishing was originally to be permitted up to 20 nautical miles (37 km) offshore under the 1994 Gaza-Jericho agreement.[140] The agreement wasn’t implemented and Israel allows fishermen to travel only 3 nautical miles (5.6 km) offshore, reduced from 6 nmi (11 km) in 2007. Israeli officials say the restrictions are necessary because of past incidents of Palestinians using fishing boats for smuggling and attacks. One fisherman who went outside these limits was forced to strip down to his underwear and swim to a naval vessel.[142] He was blindfolded, handcuffed and taken in for questioning. The Israeli Navy’s response was that it was checking for weapons. The Navy reports they intercepted the craft entering Gaza from Egypt. B’Tselem has released a report documenting the “continual shooting at, abuse of, and humiliation of” Palestinian fishermen.[142]
According to the Fishing Under Fire Report 2009,[143] since the declaration of the “ceasefire”(18 January 2009), till the end of 2009:
– 1 fisherman was killed by naval gunfire.
– at least 7 fishermen have been injured by naval gunfire and at least another one sustained burns after shelling in the sea, while another fisherman was reported by several media to be lightly injured by gunfire, but his name wasn’t reported.
– at least 6 Palestinian civilians were injured on shore by Israeli Naval gunfire (among them 4 children) and several others have been reportedly injured (among them another 5 fishermen have been reportedly injured on shore by Israeli shelling)
– 68 arrests of fishermen have been reported (at least 2 fishermen arrests twice) and 29 “confiscations” of fishing boats. Several fishing boats have been returned but with damages and equipment missing, and at least one hassaka (small fishing boat) was confiscated again.
– 1 Greek boat of the Free Gaza Movement (“Spirit of Humanity”, official name “Arion”) was seized and confiscated and all the 21 passengers and crew detained and later deported.
The UN Office for the Coordination of Humanitarian Affairs has estimated that Gaza fishermen need to journey at least 12–15 nautical miles from shore to catch larger shoals, and sardines in particular are 6 nmi (11 km) offshore. Shoals closer to shore have been depleted. The total catch pre-blockade in 1999 was nearly 4,000 tons, this was reduced to 2,700 tons in 2008. In the 90s, the Gaza fishing industry was worth $10 million annually or 4% of the total Palestinian economy; this was halved between 2001 and 2006. 45,000 Palestinians were employed in the fishing industry, employed in jobs such as catching fish, repairing nets and selling fish. Fish also provided much-needed animal protein to Gazans’ diet.[144]
The International Committee of the Red Cross also notes that “90% of Gaza’s 4000 fishermen are now considered either poor (with a monthly income of between 100 and 190 US dollars) or very poor (earning less than 100 dollars a month), up from 50% in 2008.” Nezar Ayyash, head of Gaza’s fishermen’s union, is quoted as saying that he has been arrested and his boat confiscated several times.[136]”
Famine oddly enough rarely appears as a universal absence of food, but takes the form of food too expensive for the poor. The classic example should be the great Irish famine. Hence the emphasis on poverty levels in Gaza in the Wikipedia article cited. (link to the whole thing: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blockade_of_the_Gaza_Strip#Effect_on_the_fishing_industry)
No doubt it is a very uncomfortable thought but, how is a commitment to a Jewish state different from a commitment to a Christian state? Or an Islamic state? The old slogan, Ein Reich, Ein Volk, Ein Gott, should remind us that even ordinary, supposedly secular nationalism, may not be so in practice. Is it really so certain that the Christianity had nothing to do with the Holocaust? That crimes far worse than those attributed to Islam were committed within living memory?
Commitment to a Jewish state is exactly the same as commitment to a Polish state, a German state, a French state. It is a national state of Jews. Being a Jew does not mean being a follower of Judaizm. The proportion of atheists among Israeli Jews is much higher that the proportion of atheists in for example Poland. And they are still Jews as well as Polish atheists are Poles.
I hope your comment is not meant to show the equivalence of Gaza with the Warsaw ghetto. I’m surprised, though, that you don’t say anything about the misdeeds of the Palestinians. You go on and on about the fisherman, but conveniently forget the suicide bombers from Palestine who kill Israeli civilians. Or those from Hamas who fire rockets willy-nilly into Israel behind civilian cover, hoping to kill anybody. Is there a reason you’re calling out only one side?
Well, fine, call out the Israelis and ignore the Palestinian miscreants. But what I want to say here is that this type of rabid anti-Semitism is not limited to two people. The stuff that appears in state-sponsored Arab media every day is just as bad. In fact, it’s pretty similar to the stuff the Nazis put out about the Jews before and during the war.
//
sub.
yup.
My mother told me stories of what had happened in Poland and Germany when she was there. She was born in 1921 and was in her prime during WW2. My father was born in 1913 and served in the Polish army…he was an angry, bitter man because of all that happened. He never got over it.
I remember when I visited Dachau (for the 1999 total eclipse ; with un-astonishing Germanic precision, the axis of the camp ran directly north-south, which framed the mid-day sun and eclipse very nicely.
What disturbed me most about that was the small, experimental, gassing chambers tucked away in a corner of the site. The physical remains of a carefully calculated design-experiment-redesign cycle dedicated to the industrial killing of people.
Still gives me a shudder to think of it. Good, effective scientists and engineers worked out how to build those things. Whether they did it out of intimidation or ideology, it’s still a chilling thought.
I visited Auschwitz in 1994 and Dachau in 1996. Auschwitz left a much greater impression on me for a few reasons. Dachau, being near Munich, had far more visitors than I saw at Auschwitz, especially at Auschwitz II-Birkenau. The weather was miserable — cold, windy, and overcast with drizzle turning into light snow — so most people weren’t wandering far into Birkenau. I walked all over while my companions sought shelter to stay dry and warm. At times I was completely alone, and while walking among the trees near the rubble that used to be the gas chambers, I saw a fleeting piece of natural beauty that seemed incongruous in that place where so many had suffered and died. But what perhaps affected me most of all was the young students I saw in the museum at Auschwitz I. Some of them were deeply disturbed and were being comforted by their friends. They were carrying flags with a white background and a Star of David.
Indeed, the precision is chilling. The upside is that the Nazi’s kept meticulous records & although many were destroyed by order of the SS, there are still a fair amount in existence even though many are only partials.
If you go to this site, you can search for prisoner names. The data is partial & they are putting more online as they recover it. I found the names of close family friends whose grandparents were taken from their home in the Netherlands one night. I’ve seen pictures of them wearing the star of David on their clothing in their family photo albums. After the war, the family came to Canada, probably the war ended just in time or the rest of the family would’ve been sent to Auschwitz too!
If you insert the family name “Kocyba” in the search windows, the search will yield Franciszek Kocyba, camp serial number 11155 (died 29 Oct 1941). He was my wife’s grandfather, arrested at the beginning of the occupation, imprisoned and eventally killed in Auschwitz I for being a boy-scout instructor before the war (and therefore an enemy of the Reich by definition).
When you visit the Auschwitz museum for the first time, you just can’t be prepared for the impact.
What I find sickening is that these folks have fought and killed each other for centuries over slight differences in their superstitions. These folks live in the best place on earth, one could even say they live in the “Garden of Eden”, yet, are their dark ages superstitions worth all the carnage its caused and will continue to for their and our future generations? When will we outgrow the sillyness and break the chains of religion ??
We must not be TOO tolerant of fascism, which these sickening placards demonstrate. The religion of Islam is primitive, and devious, and vile towards women, education, science, other life forms, and sexuality in all its forms. It is not a civilising influence; it is founded on hatred and bigotry and ignorance. It’s methodology is based on brainwashing little boys into subservience, so their heads are filled with koranic texts.
And here’s an odd observation. When you travel in Muslim lands, the most honest and dependable people, the least to lie or cheat you, and the most hospitable folk, – are those who go to mosque regularly.
I am not in accord with Peter kettle, above. Those placards are evidence of craziness, not evil. Your list of Muslim anti-social ‘crimes’ would equally fit London 300 years ago.
Thanks for an excellent post. Those were unspeakable crimes… heart-wrenching, painful and devastating blots on humanity’s history, and are absolutely necessary for us to hear about once again, and reflect on.
Do those posters not fall under the category of ‘hate literature’? What are the US laws on that?
It is allowed.
I was opposed to Canada’s hate crime laws when they first came out but now that I’ve seen their responsible use, I am in favour of them. For years before these laws we struggled to get rid of the notorious Ernst Zundel (he’s Germany’s problem now – he was locked up there for inciting racial hate). Now, Americans are stuck with the latest jerk that Canada charged with hate crimes, the infamous Craig Cobb who has settled in South Dakota after fleeing Canada & is hard at work buying up land to start his own bizarre Neo-Nazi group. Unfortunately, he has dual citizenship which probably complicates extradition but I suspect Canada doesn’t really want him back (at least that was what an official in South Dakota suggested in an interview on CBC).
I tend to think that our hate laws are an unfortunate but necessary exception to the hugely important value of free speech. My understanding is that hate propaganda used against the Jews in Germany and later against the Tutsis in Rwanda played a really strong role in paving the way for the subsequent genocides.
It is another curious example of what a person’s being completely consumed by hate does to them. However, Canada seems to have relatively few of these clowns, proportionally, compared with down here? Or, at least they aren’t as vocal? Is that an accurate observation?
PS, Thanks for sending us another one!! 🙂
It’s hard to say – we have a smaller population so maybe that’s why! 🙂
Judging from the US, the further south you get, the more extreme and belligerent people get. Maybe it’s an excess of sunlighty or humidity…
“Belligerent” ?? further south ?? have you ever been to New York City?? perhaps “ignorant” was the word you wanted to link to US lattitude…. well until you hit mile marker 0 in key west, then all norms are out the window !!
I’ve never heard the term “Jewishophobia”, but to say we hear “almost nothing” of anti-Semitism seems incredible. I hear of anti-Semitism all the time, to the extent that the abuse of this term, particularly by the American right-wing, threatens to dilute it’s original meaning.
All one need do to be accused of anti-Semitism in the US is to publicly argue that some policies of the Israeli government deserve to be criticized. If you are Jewish and do this, you might just be labeled self-hating, but for non-Jews the anti-Semitism label is applied way too fast and loose by those desperate to portray Israel as flawless and blameless.
One can be fully supportive of the right of Israel to exist as a Jewish nation, and be philo-Semitic toward Jews and Jewish culture, and nonetheless be labeled anti-Semitic for disagreeing with policies of the current Israeli government toward Palestine. Certainly many Jewish Israelis do the same and are nonetheless loyal to the state of Israel and to Judaism.
What is meant by “Western Liberal’s public disapproval of Israel”? There is a difference between being against the existence of Israel, and being against certain policies or actions on the part of Israel’s government. I would like to see some evidence that more than a tiny fraction of western liberals who voice opposition to Israel fall into the former rather than the latter category. I see lots of anger among liberals about building settlements and prolonging occupation in what appears to be a blatant attempt to realize permanent annexation of the West Bank, but very little hostility toward being Jewish or maintaining an Israeli state within pre-1967 borders. To say this is based on anti-Semitism seems completely wrong to me.
Of course the image posted above is brutally anti-Semitic. The web URL visible on the signs indicate these people are Salafis, the most fundamentalist of Muslims. I’m not sure what percentage of Muslims are Salafist, but Salafis won over 25% in the last election in Egypt. They are not a majority, but a disturbingly large minority world wide. I don’t know if all Salafists would support these signs. For all we know these are just a handful of kooks along the lines of the Fred Phelps Westboro Baptist “God hates fags” variety.
These horrible signs are the kind of hyperbolic rhetoric people engage in when they are enraged and frustrated and desperate to lash out at and to wound those they perceive as their tormentors. I believe that the best way to reduce the prevalence of such anger would be for the government of Israel to work very very hard with the PA to reach a peace accord that creates a sovereign Palestinian nation, with just compensation for those displaced from properties and homes and refused readmittance as a result of the war in 1948.
Yeah, blame the signs and anti-Semitism on the Jews themselves. That’s really sophisticated thinking! They brought it on themselves.
And really, you’re saying the best way to reduce this is for the government of Israel to work to reach a peace accord? Why not ask the Palestinians to work just as hard, and, by the way, to stop their suicide bombing?
Frankly, I’m tired of people blaming anti-Semitism on the Jews(“those they perceive as their tormentors”). I suppose you could say that anti-Semitic rhetoric of the Nazis could also be excused because many Germans perceived the Jews as the architects of their misery.
Have you considered that these people don’t consider Jews their tormentors, but simply their sworn enemies? No, I didn’t think so.
Sorry,that won’t wash.
And, by the way, I am critical of some Israeli policies, and I don’t consider myself an anti-Semite.
The phrase, “A pox on both their houses!” comes to mind.
The Israeli government has done plenty of indefensible things.
The Palestinian government has done plenty of indefensible things.
One can argue over which has been worse, but that’s not unlike trying to separate a pair of mud-wrestling pigs.
Just as with the Irish Troubles, or the Hatfields and McCoys, I really don’t see much hope of things getting any better at least until the current generation has retired from politics. There’s no reason why the Middle East shouldn’t be a vital economic and artistic and social powerhouse, and there are enclaves demonstrating what the future should (and hopefully will) resemble.
But it ain’t gonna happen until both sides have the courage to let bygones be bygones, to drop grudges (including those with fresh justifications), and to love peace more than righteousness. In particular, that means Palestinians giving up on this “right of return” nonsense, and Israelis not only stopping settlement expansion, but probably just outright giving settlements to the Palestinians. Some well-funded strategic integration would probably be in order…have huge lotteries with many thousands of winners to give people on both sides of the wall free new or newly renovated homes, but with the catch that they have to move to the opposite side of the wall, and structure those neighborhoods so the houses are alternating between Israelis and Palestinians.
That’s obviously not going to happen artificially, and the fighting isn’t going to stop until it’s happened organically.
Cheers,
b&
And like you say, “ain’t gonna happen”. not for several generations at least, if what we saw in Ulster is anything to go by.
If I gave the impression that I blame the signs on Israel or Jews, I’m very sorry. I didn’t try to say that at all. Obviously these signs are to be blamed on the Salafist mindset, and the fact that this group of individuals has let their anger get out of control.
But I do think there are legitimate reasons for anger, and as you suggest, the PA has a responsibility to find intelligent ways to channel anger and injustice into constructive progress. Obviously the Fred Phelps style Muslim idiots and their signs are not the way to go.
My remarks here were intended to convey that the existence of these idiots with their idiotic signs is not a reason to write off all Palestinians as anti-semitic terrorists. I also attempted to convey that Israel is not blameless in this conflict. I wasn’t trying to entirely describe the whole conflict, so many important ideas were not mentioned. I was absolutely not trying to say that Israel should be blamed for these signs, which are hyperbolic non-sense.
First off, the Palestinians have far less control, and far less economic and military power than the Israelis. So in very real terms, equal responsibility can’t be imposed on both sides. The Israelis have a fully sovereign state, while the Palestinians are under military occupation. They can’t even build a housing development and secure water rights on the West Bank without permission from the Israeli government. So the asymmetry here needs to be taken into account. Palestinians are under Israeli thumbs, not vice versa.
But the PA has worked hard, and was on the verge of an agreement with Ehud Olmert before Netanyahu torpedoed the whole deal. It is true that the PA is in a complicated political position, always trying to walk the line between representing all Palestinians and not becoming tainted by Hamas. That doesn’t stop uncritical supporters of Israel’s attempt to permanently annex Judea and Samaria from using Hamas as a bludgeon to undermine any moderate progress made by the PA. It is in Likud’s best interests to keep everyone looking at Hamas and away from the PA. But as I suggested, peace and a Palestinian state will be the most effective way to melt away much of the hostility and anger that sustains Hamas. I’m not blaming the fact of Hamas on Israel here, just making what I feel is a plain statement of fact about what Israel’s best choices are.
For years the PA security forces have worked in coordination with Israeli Defense Forces in anti-terror operations against terrorists in the West Bank. They never seem to get any credit in the western press for this, even though they have taken heat from some of their own people for doing so. The PA opposes suicide bombing, and so do I. I have long argued that the Palestinians would have been much wiser to take lessons from Ghandi and Martin Luther King in their fight for rights and freedom from Israeli oppression. They made a huge stupid mistake to ever engage in terrorist bombings, and it has completely undermined the moral authority they otherwise would have held in this situation. They played right into the Israeli right-wing’s hands. The Likud party, since its founding, has always supported the policy of taking all of Judea and Samaria to be part of Israel. It has just taken them a long time to find practical ways to achieve that long standing goal.
Again, sorry for creating the wrong impression. The simplest way to say what I mean is:
There are legitimate reasons to be angry with Israel, which can be blamed on Israel.
There are not legitimate reasons for people to vent their anger with signs suggesting Auschwitz should reopen, or that Israel should be nuked, and Israel can’t be blamed for this.
Likewise, I felt that Al Qaeda had some legitimate reasons to be upset with the United States, which the US could be blamed for.
But Al Qaeda did not have a legitimate reason to destroy the Twin Towers and all the innocent lives that were lost, and the US can’t be blamed for that.
People’s emotional reactions in such conflicts seem to always lead them to lump many different actions and ideas into binary categories of “us vs them”, and “good vs evil”, when it’s never really that simple.
For me, that was perhaps the most terrifying aspect of Bin Laden: many of his complaints were, indeed, legitimate. But the manner in which he chose to address those complaints not only did nobody any good, they only made his stated concerns that much worse.
Bin Laden was a CIA agent and Al Qaeda a CIA construct. This is not lunatic conspiracy theory, but simple history: we openly created Al Qaeda and recruited bin Laden — and funded and armed and supported them and him — to repel the Soviet invasion of Afghanistan. They were our primary allies in the region.
That the net effect of bin Laden’s and Al Qaeda’s actions since the collapse of the Soviet Union has been to solidify the power of the American surveillance apparatus. Since it’s been the driving force in that process, it’s hard not to imagine some truly horrifying conspiracies.
Just who, exactly, is pulling whose strings at 1600 Pennsylvania Avenue and around the globe?
b&
Good question. In my most paranoid moments I fear that the first part of a new President’s orientation may be a meeting with some shadowy military/intelligence types who inform him that they control the Secret Service, and that if he swerves from their script on national security policy, then he and his family are in danger.
It would explain a lot.
On the other hand, the incredible competence and far reaching control of events required to maintain such conspiracies seem beyond all credibility. The arming of bin Laden was probably only conceived of as containment of Soviet expansion. That it ended up resulting in a second Pearl Harbor, enabling a huge expansion of the security state was probably more dumb luck than ruthless prescience.
Maybe closer to the truth is that if you go into office expecting to maneuver government like it is a sports car, when what you actually have are the controls of something much larger and unwieldy than an aircraft carrier, you very quickly realize you need to change your expectations, compromise your ideals, and yield to a certain amount of overwhelming inertia if you want to have any hope of doing anything at all.
It wouldn’t take anything near so pinky-wavingly puppy-kickingly evil.
Remember the Watergate burglary?
The NSA already has the ability to do far more espionage on political candidates than would have resulted had the Watergate burglary been a success, and they’ve had that ability for ages.
At this point it’s almost impossible imagining somebody running for national office and the NSA not knowing all said person’s dirty laundry — all the affairs, all the bribes, all the drunk driving arrests, everything. Which makes the equation very simple: the NSA approaches the candidate they think will best suit their own goals in whatever manner they already know will be most effective. It could be a brilliant young strategist who magically knows what the opposition is going to do before the opposition itself does, or it could just be a guy with a briefcase full of cash. And once said politician is bought, the fact that they’ve been bought (whether they realized at the time that they were being bought or not) is itself generally sufficient material to use to blackmail them to make sure they stay bought…and that’s before one gets to all the dirt that the NSA already has.
This is no different from the exact same style of corruption used by the Mafia and the like over the ages, which, again, is what makes it so frightening.
Besides. Bush Senior was the freakin’ director of the CIA before he was elected. Do I really need to make any further observations?
Cheers,
b&
At least we can have this conversation without fearing government agents will kick down the door and arrest us in the middle of babbhhhhh,,,,,,,……..?………xxxxxxxnbnnhnnbnnmm,,
Ben, I think you have enough material for a best-selling novel.
The puppy kicking villain needs to be Cruella de Vil-esque
The sad thing is, I’m afraid it’s a documentary that Edward Snowden has already written and is just publishing in serial form….
b&
Oh, they know they’ve been bought. Corporations decide who we get to vote for. I am NOT some anti-corporation, vegan, conspiracy-theorist hippie. However, what would our elections look like if corporations were maxed at $10,000 contributions? It will never happen, but it should. We The People my ass.
But, haven’t you heard? Corporations are people, my friend.
Cheers,
b&
Jeanine you state :
“We The People my ass.”
This is because you have chosen to give up and label those that still would like to change our nation for the better as “conspiracy-theorist hippies”…. If your not part of the solution, your part of the problem….
Not my part of the problem.
Jerry, you said:
“And, by the way, I am critical of some Israeli policies, and I don’t consider myself an anti-Semite.
Of course not. And no intelligent, right thinking person would ever consider themselves an anti-Semite. That was part of Jeff’s point. It was clear that he was saying people who were not anti-Semites have been labeled as such in an attempt to silence any criticism of Israel and its policies, i.e., some might label you an anti-Semite. The problem is with being labeled an anti-Semite by someone else, not how one self-identifies. To quote Jeff:
“All one need do to be accused of anti-Semitism in the US is to publicly argue that some policies of the Israeli government deserve to be criticized. If you are Jewish and do this, you might just be labeled self-hating, but for non-Jews the anti-Semitism label is applied way too fast and loose by those desperate to portray Israel as flawless and blameless.
You’ve not only criticized some of Israel’s policies, you’ve also frequently pointed out the bad behavior of religious Jews (a particular Rabbi whose name escapes me comes to mind). If you haven’t been labeled a “self-hating Jew” or an anti-Semite by some religious Jews, I’d be very surprised. It’s obviously inaccurate and that’s what Jeff was criticizing: this misuse and abuse of the term. It can be used in a similar manner as “Islamophobia” – to shut people up.
Jerry, you also state:
“I claim that anti-Semitism also plays some role in Western liberals’ public disapproval of Israel.
I respectfully ask where the evidence is for this? Liberals tend to be far less bigoted than conservatives. I am not suggesting that liberals are immune to bigotry, just that it’s antithetical to liberal thought and is harshly criticized by other liberals when it does show itself.
I’m not going to name names, but I have heard liberals make statements that are clearly anti-semitic. One example: “All YOU PEOPLE feel the same way about Israel” (i.e., “you people” = Jews, addressed to me).
How about this one (from a liberal): “You know why Jews are smarter than non-Jews? Because when they rounded up the Jews in the ghettos, only the smart ones got away.” That implied a form of natural selection, and was NOT a joke, believe me.
If you think anti-Semitism is gone among liberals, you’re simply wrong. And OF COURSE no liberal is going to admit that they’re anti-Semitic, or make obvious anti-semitic remarks. The two above were made out of public earshot.
Enough evidence for you? I suppose you want evidence that racism plays no role in any liberal’s attitude towards blacks, either.
I’m done here. This thread started as a reminder of lingering hatred of and violence against Jews, and the fear that it could ignite again if some people got power. It has devolved, as usual, into a string of criticisms against Israel.
The usual double standard applies: Israel is held to a moral standard far higher than is applied to Palestinians.
I’m not Jewish, I am liberal, and I couldn’t agree more.
Thank you for your response, Jerry and I do very much appreciate the evidence.
Again, I never stated that there were no bigoted liberals, just that it was antithetical to liberal thought (and no, I don’t think all liberal ideals are, well, ideal – alt medicine & apologetics for the behavior of the Muslim world are all too common in modern liberal thinking) and that most liberals would criticize those making bigoted comments. That the comments you quote were made out of public earshot is an indication that such comments are not looked upon kindly (to say the vary least) in the liberal world.
Sorry the thread evolved in the way it did, I’d just like to point out that I never criticized Israel here.
The only thing that scares me about Israel is the Xtian fundamentalists take on it – it must survive because of the role it plays in the upcoming – very soon! – apocalypse. But then that’s not a criticism of Israel of course.
I doubt that is a role the Israeli’s will take upon them.
It’s funny that the apocalypse is always supposed to happen in the near future. It’s almost as if it is used as a threat to make the god-fearing homo sapiens even more god-fearing, and to strike fear into their enemies hearts.
We better repent and prepare ourselves for the forthcoming end of the world. Pascal’s wager beefed up with a bit of splatter and blood. 😉
“Yeah, blame the signs and anti-Semitism on the Jews themselves.”
It’s also an incredibly patronising attitude (and has a mildly colonial feel, ironically enough). It paints the sign makers and their ilk as unthinking drones who simply respond reflexively to an external agency. It doesn’t give them the credit of formulating their noxious views through independent thought and seeks to shift blame from them with a pat on the head.
Thank you for writing this post. It shouldn’t be necessary to explain this again and again, but the picture alone is enough to tell me it is. This makes me extremely sad.
I don’t think I’ll ever truly understand the scourge that is anti-Semitism. I’m currently reading Hannah Arendt’s book “Eichman In Jerusalem”. It is fascinating but deeply disturbing. The more I read, the more baffled I become by the catastrophic moral and intellectual failure of so many Europeans during the holocaust.
I am very interested to hear your insights Jerry.
I feel strongly that I would like to aid in the eradication of anti-Semitism but I am at a loss as to how to go about it.
What an unpleasant topic. Nevertheless, it is one that everyone should ponder, especially on how easily Hitler was able to incite barbarous behavior from Germans from all sectors of society using nothing more than folk tales, pseudoscience and dissatisfaction. American geneticist Herman J. Muller, who was in Germany when Hitler took power (he had lost his university job in the US for his social activism), has given a sobering account of the appalling anti-Semitism in his Berlin genetics lab.
Hitler’s racism, sensu lato, was premised on the idea that only Aryan Europeans possessed the gift of creativity, and that creativity in the world was under threat by mixing with non-Aryans. Hitler’s message was that, for the Volk to survive, preventing ‘race’ mixing was the pinnacle of morality. Contrary to popular accounts, there was no concerted effort to create a “Master Race.” In the eyes of the Nazi’s, it already existed. Nazi eugenics proposed little more than cleaning up genetic blemishes on already manifest Aryan perfection.
The question of the “Master Race” has become confused with Hitler’s assertion that the Nazis would create a “New Man.” However, this New Man was not a genetic superman, but rather a psychological one. The New Man was the soldier who could overcome his repugnance of killing and learn to engage in massacres of inferior beings in the name of a “higher” moral, the survival of mankind. Ugh!
Just my 2 cents.
When I lived in Germany back in the mid and later 70s I visited Dachau. That was with out doubt the most disturbing experience of my life. One of the most vivid things that has stuck with me to this day was the smell of the ovens. It is insane how brutal humans can be to other humans.
To be brutalized like that changes you for the rest of your life. And it changes for life those inflicting the brutality as well. That for me is why it is important that my society does not do things like institutionalize torture. I don’t want to go back to a society where casual brutality is the norm, and that is where that path always seems to have led in the past.
It’s shameful. And the history hideous.
Since I need even a little drop of antidote I note that the new Iranian regime choose to drop the denial of the Holocaust yesterday (I think):
“Iran’s new foreign minister has proffered Jews a second olive branch after wishing them a happy new year by declaring that his country does not deny the Holocaust.”
(Of course, he then went on to equalize Israel with Nazi Germany… :-/)
If this keeps, Holocaust denialists will have lost a prominent source of support.
I grew up in London under bombing that blew half my house down. I blame religion. Hitler’s Christian values are only now coming to the foreground. According to William Shirer’s book of the Third Reich, Hitler had a plan to become a priest. Hitler’s books and speeches were riddled with appeals to his gods; his soldiers swore an oath to almighty god, and his soldiers had ‘in god we trust’ on their belts.
As a foetus was an atheist in a lapsed Catholic family. I often see religion as the root problem. I spent several years as a television doc. filmmaker in War Zones; Sarajevo, Guatemala, Montenegro and Serbia, and in African wars. You have all seen my work. But the one astonishing fact is that there are quite advanced techniques of ‘conflict-resolution’ hardly known to the world. It is an advanced form of diplomacy started by visiting the enemy and listening to their grievances. They in turn, listen to our grievances. President Kim of N Korea and the new Iranian president should be invited to London and Washington for friendly visits. As the possibility of war fades, so New High-Powered Diplomacy may take-over.
In the light of this New Diplomacy there is another way of regarding that photo calling for a return of Auschwitz. It is shocking, but moreover it is symptomatic of serious irrationality. It works like this.
We English tend to have a sympathy for Arabs. After my travels in Arab countries there is something about Arabs I should tell you. When they feel threatened or aggrieved, displaced or dispossessed, they will often make quite horrible threats in return. It is not pretty, but then it is not as serious as one might fear. Remember Saddam Hussein in Iraq threatening the Mother of All Wars, while forwarding a puny army. I was in Iraq as the first Gulf War started and got the very first film and photos of that war which went on every media outlet in the world. When you understand the irrational basis of Arab threats, then you do not feel that same anger. Try to be forgiving of Palestinian anger. When you know Palestinians (I even dated a girl for a while) then you truly understand their depths of despair. Threatening to kill others is nasty, but it is also the threats of the crazy. It doesn’t seem so bad when you keep that in mind.
I visited Auschwitz in the sixties, before it was ‘tidied-up’ A few days later, my then Jewish girlfriend started crying in the night, and asking, ‘Did they suffer?’ I replied that no-one is suffering now. That’s all I had. But it’s not true, you know.
Can I request that others try to be restrained in their understandable anger. Especially towards the Muslims, most of whom are daily humiliated by the few fanatics. Travel in Muslim lands and sit to eat mutton with Muslim families, and you cannot get angry again. And for goodness-sake, please us you real names.
Have to agree with you when you pick up individuals they are much nicer than the mob.
However, discounting Arab threats as mere showing off sounds like the Orientalism whining of the late E. Said: we’ve been colonized, exploited… In other words, our poor fate is the product of western misdeeds. So we’re not responsible for our destiny.
This also implies that Arabs are not like everybody else, they’re like children or idiots, that should be regarded with condescension.
Ben,
I certainly do not think that blood-curdling Arab threats are a form of ‘mere showing-off’ ! (Photos of placards calling for a return of Auschwitz) Those threats are more like a traditional tribal response that was probably quite effective when conflict was settled with fist-fights. These days such threats do far more harm than good, raising far more opposition and determination in the minds of the supposed enemy, and also putting a greater gulf between the parties who need to engage in conversation. Nor do I think that those threats can be compared with those of a child, or an idiot, to be regarded with condescension.
We have to deal with the world as it is, and not as we wish it to be. I once joined a Palestinian protest outside the American Embassy in London, (with my movie-camera and a Jordanian woman’s scarf round my head!) to hear the anger from the inside of the crowd. My conclusion. The anger is real, but the threats were fanciful.
Both the Palestinians and the Israelis have an acute fear of losing ancestral lands. That fear seems far greater than you may find in other conflicts. But the Israelis seem to be working to a long-term plan to engage in protracted ‘Peace-Plans’ over years, while quietly settling upon Palestinian territory. Bennie Netanyahu is a master at ‘Negotiating-Table Invasion’. And the Palestinians fall for it all the time. Do we all suspect that if the Palestinians reunited, and announced the end to all violence and to the holding of weapons, then world opinion would move solidly behind their cause? We cannot be sure, but it might be a winning tactic leading to the founding of a Palestinian homeland, and reclamation of both the settlements, and East Jerusalem.
To be honest, when I first saw these images I had a hard time believing it…
That fellow human beings can think such things, let alone feel justified in airing such views.
Truly vile.
You really don’t want to be exposed to some of the repugnant anti semitic propaganda out there then. It’s shocking that such things exist in a modern, civilized state! The same goes for rampant sexist and racist views that should be harder to come by. At least they have been pushed to the shadows of our societies (the majority of people feel repulsion and react with outrage when the encounter such views0 but they are still there & that is shameful.
I despise ALL religions, does this make me anti-Semitic?? I think not, it makes me an anti-theist. Have we not learned yet that this is how people with religion treat each other? Are you not aware that they use shame, guilt, hate, fear and pity as well as murder and pedophilia to advance their agenda and power over others? Are you actually trying to make sense of their horrific actions towards others?? Good luck with that…..
It’s more than just the religious who use all those things you list as weapons against other humans thought it does use them very effectively.
As for anti-semitism, it’s bigger than religion and often includes ethnicity. My comment was to suggest that what is out there in the shadows of society is worse than what we see in public protests (anti-semitic or otherwise) but the fact that these repugnant attitudes are relegated to the shadows is progress. Read a newspaper article from 60 years ago where minorities are mentioned. It’s shocking to us that people were referred to in such a manner & that it was clearly acceptable to do so given that newspapers wrote like that.
“Repugnant attitudes” are not hiding in the shadows, they are prevalent on all sides, arabs and jews have hated each other for centuries and the xians “need” the conflict so their beloved apocalyptic armageddon can come true…. Try this on for size
“I look to a day when people will not be judged by their religious doctrine , but by the content of their character.”
Of course I pilfered that from Dr. King, but it holds true and is a lesson all theists and non-theists alike could use to learn from.
Hiding bigotry behind the cloak of “religious freedom” is unacceptable !!
It is curious that those people who deny that the Holocaust ever happened still invoke it when it’s politically expedient to do so.
I don’t know why I didn’t notice this irony before but I’ll keep this tucked away for use as a witty retort that I’m sure I’ll get to use in the future.
I recall, about 20 years ago laughing when there was a protest in Canada. I can’t recall the details but there were pro-Israel folks on one side of the street and pro-Palestinian folks on the other. I think the worst thing that happened is someone threw and egg and Canadians were appalled at it. I laughed because compared to the middle east, this was nothing.
Now, it seems things have escalated. There seems to be a lot more intolerance but at the same time, a lot more people who publicly reject the intolerance so I can’t tell if we’re progressing or not.
I think the fact that we have so much more information available today often creates the impression that somehow people are worse.
Not only is it easier for cranks to get their message out, but every crazy event gets more coverage and a certain percentage are far more likely to enter our consciousness than was the case 30 years ago.
I think Pinker is right, things overall are getting better, and on the whole the Internet is a “net” force of understanding and peace.
I suspect that there are some angry and frustrated groups in the world, who might have been led to terrorism as an attention getter decades ago, but who are now placated by having the ability to run their own website and solicit donations from supporters world wide. It defuses the feeling of complete powerlessness.
It is good news that it appears states decry these attitudes and often a group of people will show up and protest against such things.
One example I saw was in a scene in the Unbelievers where during an angry Islamic protest in Australia that had Islamists shouting over a microphone. The Aussies started chanting “where are the women?!” and drowning him out! Awesome.
I wonder what it is about this particular conflict that makes it appear unresolvable and almost instantly divides people?
Maybe, just maybe, it is because the Israelis and the Palestinians are THE SAME PEOPLE, divided by religeon! I have dated a Jewish girl and a Palestinian girl. (Not at the same time; I’m not stupid!!) And they are inter-changeable!
You might be in very very big trouble if your ex-girlfriends ever learn you think they are inter-changeable.
I can’t tell if this is supposed to be a joke or not. If it is, it’s not very funny. If not…wow.
I think george is probably referring to Semites and noting that Israelis and Palestinians share a common culture and didn’t intend to be offensive. Of course, there are many different ethnicities in Israel.
I think it’s hard to make a clear judgement on a good part of this because as Americans, we don’t see/hear very much on what is actually happening within the Palestinian areas, but have for over 50 years been made very aware of Israel’s side of the story. While there are certainly atrocities and violence being committed by both sides, there is also an imbalance of power and resources. In my view, Israel has moved beyond acting in self defense and has become the aggressor and possibly the overseer of an aparthied system. I realize that Jimmy Carter got in a whole pack of trouble for offering this view, and no doubt had accusations of anti-semitism flung his way. After years of being very supportive of Israel, I am coming to fear that it is moving to become somewhat like very monster that necessitated its creation in the first place (and no, I am not speaking of Hitler, etc.) I mean they are losing the political ability to identify with the underdog, somthing that the Jews themselves endured for centuries.
If harsh criticism of Israel’s government/policies or even of the tenets of Judaism is constantly met with or blocked by charges of anti-semitism, those who react this way only harm the future of Israel.
As far as this photo goes, it can easily be countered with photos and videos of the harrassment of children and farmers in Hebron. It’s just that most Americans don’t see those.
It is indeed one of the most tragic ironies of history that a people who were so grotesquely and savagely terrorized, disowned, displaced and annihilated by the most brutal means imaginable and unimaginable then turn around to establish their homeland imposing themselves by coercion in turn displacing and disowning another group of people.
For hints as to the likelihood of that being acknowledged AND taken into account in a resolution of the conflict take a look at the history of the Native Americans.
Might makes right is the formula that obtains
Umm. . .you speak as though Israel was established solely via Jewish coercion. I presume you know the history of the state of Israel, which includes the approval of such a homeland by the League of Nations in the 1920s. Your potted history is both innacurate and invidious.
If you go back and read the original British Mandate from the San Remo conference, you can see that the notion of Jewish Homeland at that time was more of a refuge than a sovereign Jewish state, though for political reasons people often try to imply more than was intended at the time.
https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/intrel/britman.htm
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/British_Mandate_for_Palestine_(legal_instrument)
For example it clearly stated that Jewish immigration should be allowed, but also that this should in no way infringe upon the rights and autonomy of existing residents. It specified that all public signs must be in Hebrew and Arabic, that stamps and money and all other official printing was to be in both Hebrew and Arabic.
What was envisioned was a land run by Britain where Jews and Arabs could live equally with full rights and protections.
It wasn’t until after WWII that the UN explicitly addressed the long sought Zionist goal of a Jewish sovereign state. Israel was given a gift by the International community of 56% of the land that was called Palestine under the British Mandate. Arabs were given the remainder for a state. But the perception of Arabs was that 56% had been taken from them.
Today Israel possesses 88% of this land, and seems determined to take all of the rest as well. Many supporters of Israel deny Palestinians are a people or deserve a state, even though authorization for a Palestinian state was established by the same UN resolution that created Israel.
I think the analogy to Native Americans, while not perfect, has a certain validity. One aspect is the technological gap, clearly not as extreme as European vs Native Americans, but very significant. The Jewish immigrants to Palestine and Israel were Europeans and North Americans. They were lawyers, architects, engineers, scientists. They had run factories, been involved in large scale civil engineering, they were educated to a degree far beyond what obtained among the existing Arab population. What was a tribal run agricultural society was being transformed by modern Europeans. So there is an element of the “Guns, Germs, & Steel” narrative going on here, one that has been repeated over and over in human history as people with more developed tools and skills displace people that are less developed.
I’m not saying the Jews do not deserve a homeland. And given the hostility of Arabs (which is also understandable given the history) the Jewish defense of their nation is perfectly understandable. But far too often the most zealous defenders of Israel overreach and try to make out that the Palestinians are some kind of savages who deserve nothing. There is a kind of manifest destiny at work that will not be satisfied until it rules all the land between the sea and the river.
Today the story that says Israel is existentially threatened by surrounding Arab neighbors seems far less credible than the story that Israel, a nation of immigrants, is well on its way toward crowding out a native population.
You seem to be completely neglecting the contention by godsbuster that Israel somehow forced its own existence as a state on the rest of the world. Instead, you argue something else. Then you finally admit that yes, a UN vote established the country.
Then you contradict yourself:
(I love the double negative, which of course is meant to weaken your assertion.)
vs.
Which is it? Are the surrounding countries hostile or not? Would they leave Israel alone if it didn’t have formidable defenses?
You know, of course, that the Hamas charter denies Israel’s right to exist. And anyone who knows anything about Israel’s history cannot credibly claim that its existence is “not existentially threatened by its Arab neighbors.” That statement is so far removed from reality that it discredits your entire post.
Finally, nobody on this site, or any decent person I know of, has claimed that the Palestinians are some kind of savages who deserve nothing. Yes, some of the Palestinians are indeed savages, like those who encourage others to strap bombs to their bodies so they can go to pizzerias to kill women and children.
For reasons known best to yourself, you never mention those things, but always concentrate on the Israeli misdeeds. Believe me, if Israel sent suicide bombers into Gaza to kill women and children, or fired random rockets into that area to terrorize the population, you’d be the first to complain.
I’m not sure that’s what godbuster said exactly. He may have meant that coercion is involved in taking over the West Bank, as opposed to the entire establishment of Israel. But my main point was to address the history. I think the history I presented effectively rebuts godbuster as you interpret him. Clearly the nation of Israel was created legally with the support of the international community. It just wasn’t established on all of the land between the river and the sea.
The double negative was because I was anticipating the inevitable reaction whenever any criticism of Israel is involved. I was preemptively refuting the inevitable.
For the record, I unequivocally believe the Jews deserve a homeland, and I support the existence of Israel. My argument is with the attempt to take over the West Bank and Gaza.
When I say something is “understandable”, I mean that if I were in the position of those people, I might feel the same. I don’t mean that what is understandable is necessarily justified or correct. Of course Israel has a perfect right to defend itself, but my point was that defense goes too far when people pretend that Israel would be existentially threatened if they didn’t militarily control the West Bank. This claim isn’t borne out by the analyses of military experts. It’s a talking point that deserves to be debunked. Yes of course Arabs have been hostile, some much much more than others. They should not all be blamed for the existence of terrorism. The PA has actively helped Israel fight against terrorists in the West Bank.
I’m not contradicting myself when I say the following:
Note that I situate it in time with “Today”, meant to emphasize that things have changed over the last 50 years. These two competing narratives are not fixed in time. In the early history of Israel the first narrative had more truth. Today Israel is not existentially threatened, yet this narrative persists to create a sense that it is urgent for Israel to control the West Bank. Meanwhile the second narrative becomes more and more true as Israel builds more and more settlements and increases its military, political, and economic control over the West Bank.
Yes, there are varying degrees of hostility, ranging from Turkey, Jordan, Egypt, to Iran and Saudi Arabia, to Hezbollah and Hamas. Nobody is arguing that Israel should not have formidable defenses. But Israel is militarily and economically dominant in the region, with the backing of the US should it ever suffer a real military threat it can’t handle. It is most definitely not existentially threatened. Threatened by painful attacks, yes, and potential great hardships, but not threatened by total destruction.
I claim that the best chance Israel ever has of being left in peace by its neighbors is if it resolves the Palestinian conflict by enabling some 4 million Palestinians to have political and economic self-determination in a sovereign nation. Continuing on Israel’s current path will perpetuate the simmering anger that exists for historical reasons that are plain to see. The greater number of Palestinians that are able to achieve satisfying standards of living, dignity, autonomy, prosperity, the things every human needs and wants for their children, the less terrorism there will be, the less support for terrorism there will be, and in fact the more vehement opposition to terrorism there will be among the Palestinians. A sovereign Palestinian state is the first step toward creating these conditions.
To clarify the “savages” remark, I chose that word because it has some resonance with the justification for manifest destiny and westward expansion in the US.
I see imperfect but similar parallels in the Eastward expansion of Israel, and I was trying to make that case. I’ve never heard anyone literally claim Palestinians are “savages”, except perhaps when talking about terrorists.
Specifically what I had in mind is that I have often seen references to the lack of economic development and enterprise of Palestinians relative to Israel used as part of an argument to deligitimize Palestinian claims. This is prevalent in the US right wing, among conservative Jews but probably in greater numbers among conservative Christians. Even some commenters on this site have tread perilously close to the idea that Palestinians aren’t good stewards of the land, and not as worthy as Israelis because they are economically and developmentally inferior (by the numbers). I have certainly seen the argument that the continued existence of refugee camps supports the case the Palestinians don’t deserve or aren’t capable of managing a sovereign state.
I have seen this kind of thing much more often on other web sites. Newt Gingrich’s comment that the Palestinians are not a people is a dog whistle to this kind of thinking, and Mitt Romney’s remarks about culture being responsible for the different levels of prosperity between Israelis and Palestinians is treading very near to implying that a more primitive folk don’t deserve stewardship of the land.
This is a right wing attitude that can be found prevalently on right wing websites in the US. It seems to be part of the drumbeat for uncritical support of Israel, the “no daylight” contingent that funds settlement building and sees Judea and Samaria as a permanent part of Israel. The Palestinians can go live on reservations in Jordan and Syria as far as the US right-wing militantly pro-Israel crowd is concerned.
Your reasoning is a bit contrived. You graciously agree that the League of Nations talked about “Jewish National Home” – not “Arab National Home” and not “Jewish and Arab National Home” – but out of that you draw the conclusion that the idea was of a state where both groups should be absolutely equal. How does it follow? League of Nation was careful to support the rights of people who already were residing in the country – and that is more than OK, that is the only possible humane way to go, But at the same time it wanted to make home for another people who were chased away from this country centuries earlier, who retain links – both religious and cultural to this country, and a substantial Jewish population already in the country. In the 1920’s it is quite possible that British thought about this territory as their eternal colony, and not as an independent Jewish state, but it was supposed to be a British colony with Jews as a majority population and Arabs as a minority.
Your argument about signs, stamps etc. in two languages is definitely not convincing. In many states where there is a sizable minority group, speaking different language, that is the standard: everything official is in both languages but it does not change the character of the country. In Poland, in areas where many Germans reside and in the areas where many Lithuanians reside, all official signs are in Polish and German or Polish and Lithuanian. This does not change the fact that Poland is a Polish state.
This Jewish National Home was supposed to encompass both today’s Israel, West Bank and Jordan. Great Britain cut off the big chunk of it and gave it to their client’s, Hashemids. (BTW a great majority of inhabitants of Jordan are Palestinians). It was more than 2/3 of this original Jewish National Home which went to Arabs.
After the IIWW Jews were so desperate to have a place where they could settle the remnants of European Jewry, mostly languishing in different refugee camps in Europe that they agreed to just a little part of the land promised to them by League of Nation. It was Arab side which refused and started the war they lost. After this war Jews tried to make peace with Arabs and got famous three “No”. Maybe I do not have to repeat here that the war 1967 war caused by Arabs as well (enough to remind that Egypt demanded the removal of U.N. peace forces from Sinai, not to mention amassing Arab armies at Israel’s borders and the shelling of Israel by Jordan which was sure that Arab side is winning).
Native Americans do not agree with you: http://www.themetropolitain.ca/articles/view/1235
An interesting article about a Métis interest in Israel but like many groups, first nations peoples have all sorts of opinions. An extreme example is David Ahenakew who shocked us all so much that a first nations person could be an anti-semite that he had his Order of Canada revoked.
I was stating facts that come straight ouf to the San Remo Conference Resolution that established the British Mandate. I provided the link. I didn’t state “absolute” anything. I stated that Arabs and Jews were intended to be living side by side in equality, run by the British. It’s straight from the founding documents.
I don’t know what you base this statement on. Is there any historical source to indicate that the Leage of Nations intended Palestine to have a Jewish majority? I know that this is what Jews wanted, even before Theodor Herzl formalized the notion of Zionism. But I was answering the question about the actual history of what the League of Nations established.
What is the historical basis for this claim? It can’t be found in the League of Nations documents, as far as I can see. And even if it were true, and I’m pretty sure it is not, given the actual UN Resolution 181 that established the first legal boundaries of a sovereign state of Israel, how would it even be relevent?
What happened in 1948 was more complicated than simply peaceful Jews were attacked by bad Arabs who simply wouldn’t see reason and accept the totally fair UN resolution. Already in November and December of 1947 there was military activity by the Irgun and the Lehi to encourage Arabs to leave parts of Jewish land. Both sides started maneouvering for territory prior to and after the resolution, a process which eventually led to the war. I found Benny Morris’ “1948” to be an enlightening account of how complex and convoluted the real situation was.
Also, the notion that Arabs should have just accepted the resolution happily, and viewed it as the same kind of victory or gift that it was for Israel is a failure to accurately see the history. The Arabs had been living there for centuries. Most of the Jews were immigrants. That land was not under a sovereign Arab government, but it was under the same autonomous tribal leadership that had been operative under the Ottomans and largely left intact by the British. So if you were an Arab living there at that time, the very natural perception was that the UN Resolution 181 was a theft of land by the international community in order to give it to Jewish immigrants.
Now I’m not arguing that the UN did not have the legal right to do this (the Ottomans lost in WWI), and I’m not saying the partition was a bad thing. I support the existence of Israel. I’m simply saying that an honest view of what happened at that time has to acknowledge that the Arabs had good reasons, not simply based on anti-Semitism as people commonly represent, to perceive the partition as a grevious loss, as a Nakba, even though it was a joyous victory for the Jews and Zionism.
I want Israel to exist in pre-1967 borders. I’m not against Israel. I’m against Israel taking over the West Bank and Gaza, and I think that a careful examination of the history prior to 1947 going back to San Remo shows that there is no valid basis to claims that the West Bank was intended for Israel. It’s just wishful thinking and historical revision. If you think this is wrong, please cite some historical references that validate your claim.
Israel left Gaza and got thousands of rockets on its civilian population. West Bank is much closer to Israeli population centers and industrial centers. What guarantee does Israel have that leaving West Bank will not become a repetition with much graver consequences for Israeli population? Abbas and authorities of PA (with a mandate which ended almost 5 years ago) are no guarantee at all. But Israelis are not willing to risk having even a fraction of its population killed by rockets from West Bank, to have its industry to grind to a halt because of rockets and its Ben Gurion airport closed because of rockets.
You, however, seem more than willing to give Israel a chance to experience “painful attacks and potential great hardships”, but you are sure that some will survive so it is not an existential threat. It is an equivalent of saying to a mother of three children: “Take it easy. Even if two of your children are killed, you have the third one, so you should not panic”.
Under a post showing people calling for extermination of all Israelis you started the discussion of sins of Jews, repeating from time to time: “I’m for existence of Israel, but…” I was lured into the discussion about those horrible Jewish sins (against my better judgment). And now you demand that I spend an hour looking up all links which would in your eyes validate the right of Jews to exist. I do not intend to do it. You can look for yourself. I suggest you start with reading Efraim Karsh’s “Palestine Betrayed”. And I suggest that you stop being so obsessive-compulsive and stop writing about Jewish sins whatever the subject of the post.
Jeff- It looks as if you are simply reading the wrong books! 😉 Thanks for your posts. They were informative.
I am ashamed to admit I didn’t even know what “Warsaw Ghetto” was. Now I do and am sad to say I was living in quite the luxurious little bubble. This post is chilling. My stomach was turning. I couldn’t take my eyes off that cold chamber with the prussian blue. My mind cannot comprehend these horrors – that we are capable of such atrocities towards fellow human beings. What kind of person is so easily warped as to be indifferent to the starving children laying in the middle of the streets? I want to crawl back into my bubble.
Comparing Guatanamo to the horrors of Auschwitz offends me greatly. We are (the US) damned if we do and damned if we don’t. I am so torn on the subject of Syria and cannot convince myself that action or inaction is the correct answer.
You should watch The Pianist. It’s an excellent film.
Thank you – that is one of those on my “to watch” list but I never quite get to it. I am moving it to the top of my list.
” I couldn’t take my eyes off that cold chamber with the prussian blue.”
Indeed. Though I’ve known about these things since Leon Uris was on the best seller list (which I mention to date myself, not to say that all my info came from him!), the appalling, ineffably horrific facts and evidence always result in a wrenching, visceral reaction whenever I run into them. Of course I’ll read Jerry’s report on Auschwitz but in a way I’m dreading it. And historically this is so damned recent!
I checked Exodus out of the library in grade school after I saw the movie; it was the first source I read of the origin of the creation of present day Israel. I finished it and began devouring Uris books. Last summer, visiting family in a small town and out of things to talk about, I came across a small used book store where Ifound a copy of Trinity. There are contemporary fiction authors who are very very good, but I had forgotten just how superbly Leon Uris wrote stories.
I’m glad you think so too. I should no doubt revisit his work myself!
Does this give us any information about the proper response to Syria? Is Syria’s use of chemical weapons in (Yogi’s words), “de ja vu all over again”?
Reblogged this on hitchens67 Atheism WOW!! Campaign.
Thanks for that. 22 minutes well-spent.
You can use the {a href=”URL”}description{/a} construct to keep from embedding the vid… or exclude the http:// business in front of the URL.
In any case, quite informative and on topic to above discussions. And an extremely high signal to noise ratio, I thought.
psst to George Rumens: there has been previous discussion about various posters’ wishes to be anonymous or not. In very many cases, there are legitimate reasons – none apply to my situation though. By following links to individuals’ WordPress accounts it is possible to see who is truly anonymous and who isn’t (e.g., me).
Stephen Q. Muth
It is the sign on the right that is most chilling ‘May god send the mushroom cloud from the sky’ -it would not be any pathetic ‘god’, it would be moronic humans.
Powerful images of the camp. While I am not Jewish, I agree with your sentiments transcribed here. Even something as brief as this article still makes gets me verklempt.