Let me first describe what I consider to be anti-Semitism and “Islamophobia.” “Islamophobia,” properly construed—and of course I’m the construer—is simple bigotry against Muslims: dislike of an individual simply because he or she adheres to Islam. Now if that individual has invidious beliefs: oppression of women, hatred of gays, favoring murder for apostates, and so on, then I see no problem with disliking such a person. While far more Muslims than we think have such views (see the recent BBC poll), it’s simply unfair to dislike someone before you know their views, simply on the basis of what religion they claim, and even more unfair to write off or discriminate against everyone who adheres to a faith.
That, however, is different from writing off the faith as a whole, which I see as perfectly valid and not a form of bigotry. Islam, like all religions, is a delusion, its beliefs about the cosmos insupportable, and its “morality” on the whole reprehensible. Islamophobia is not dislike of Islam. Judaism is also a delusion, though I see myself as a secular Jew (I’ve explained in earlier posts what that means to me.)
Anti-semitism is like Islamophobia as it’s dislike of people simply because of their religion. It is not the same as criticism of Israeli policy, which, after all, many Jews criticize as well. I have often said that we need a two-state solution, that the settlements need to be taken down, and so on.
Both anti-Semitism and “Islamophobia”—though I’d prefer to call it “anti-Muslim bigotry” since “Islamophobia” has been conflated with dislike of Islam—are instantiated by “hate crimes”: crimes motivated at least in part by someone’s ethnicity, gender, or belief. And every enlightened person, Muslim, Jew, or atheist, should decry such bigotry. “Hate crimes” are cases in which bigotry is clearly distinguishable from simple dislike of a religion. If you attack a Muslim simply because of his clothing, or a Jew because of his yarmulke and tallis, that is a hate crime.
While the left is largely preoccupied with Islamophobia, let’s remember that “hate crimes” are far more common, at least in the U.S., against Jews. Below are data from the FBI given in a Washington Post article on February 11, showing that hate crimes against Jews are five- to six-fold more frequent than hate crimes against Muslims. As the Post reports:
It should be noted that Jews are consistently targeted for their faith more often than members of any other religious group, and that anti-Semitic crimes accounted for roughly 60 percent of religious hate crimes last year.
Note that there are about three times more Jews than Muslims in the U.S., so even if you weight the data by population, anti-Semitic hate crimes are still twice as common per capita as anti-Islamic hate crimes.
But of course we hear far less in the U.S. about anti-Semitic hate crimes than anti-Muslim hate crimes, which I believe partly reflects the double standard in the US (particularly among the American Left): Muslims are the underdog, and are regarded by many as “people of color”, so they get special privilege, and Islamophobic crimes are seen as worse than anti-Semitic crimes.
Nowhere is this double standard more prevalent than on American college campuses. While anti-Israeli sentiment is common—indeed, the norm—at U.S. universities—it’s often hard to distinguish from anti-Semitism, for many see all Jews as responsible for the perceived crimes of Israel. In cases like the one below, the veneer is clearly anti-Israel, but the core motivations are anti-Semitic. According to The Blaze, this is a video of a Jewish student being vetted for membership on the student judicial council at the University of California at Los Angeles (UCLA):
Rachel Beyda was running for a seat on the judicial council at the University of California in Los Angeles when members of the student government questioned whether her Jewish background would be a “conflict of interest.”
“The first question directed at her by General Representative 3 Fabienne Roth was an attack on Rachel’s ability to be a justice based on her involvement in the Jewish community,” Rachel Frenklak, Beyda’s roommate, wrote in an article for UCLA’s Daily Bruin. “At President Avinoam Baral’s insistence, the question was phrased slightly more considerately by Transfer Student Representative Negeen Sadeghi-Movahed, but this first question set the tone. Rachel finished the interview … [and] was asked to leave the room for council discussion.”
“What followed was a disgusting 40 minutes of what can only be described as unequivocal anti-Semitism during which some of our council members resorted to some of the oldest accusations against Jews, including divided loyalties and dishonesty,” Frenklak continued. “All council members swiftly agreed Rachel was amply qualified for the position, but half of the council had strong reservations stemming from Rachel’s Jewish identity.”
KCBS-TV reported on the story, describing one question to Beyda as: “Given that you are a Jewish student and very active in the Jewish community … given that recently … [inaudible] has been surrounding cases of conflict of interest, how do you see yourself being able to maintain an unbiased view … [inaudible]?”
I think you’ll detect the anti-Semitism in this video, despite the ridiculous insistence of people like Roth that their questions did not reflect anti-Semitism. Nobody who dislikes Jews, of course, will admit it; while anti-Semitism is perceived as bigotry, it’s okay when hidden behind the banner of anti-Zionism. I strongly believe, despite the insistence of many that criticism of Israel and Zionism is not anti-Semitic, that much of it really is.
Here’s an example of that disingenuousness. (Note that while the video says it’s about “racism,” let’s be clear: Jews are not a race, at least in the genetic sense, as they don’t form any kind of coherent genetic group. It’s about bigotry, but the lesson is the same.)
Seriously—if a black, gay, or female student had been minutely grilled in the same situation about their “membership in black/gay/women’s organizations,” and that is seen as a problem, wouldn’t what is going on here be more obvious? (See the report of the Anti-Defamation League as well.)
After the discussion, the committee rejected Beyda by a vote of 4-4-1. It was only after intervention by a faculty member, who pointed out the clearly insupportable reasons for rejecting her, that the council reversed its vote and approved her (unanimously).
This is a small incident, but it falls in a much larger class of similar cases. Are we to believe that only one or two people on U.S. campuses are anti-Semitic?
Below is a 30-minute video about the general problem of anti-Semitism on U.S. campuses. I’m not very sympathetic with the Jewish students’ views that their voices are drowned out or their views contradicted (that’s just free speech), but I do object to the discussions turning into student slurs against Jews. As for the professors proselytizing against Israel in their classes, well, that’s a touchy subject, but I wouldn’t bring it up in my classes, even if I were teaching politics instead of evolution. A professor is indeed an authority figure, and you have to be aware of your possession of a bully pulpit and of the intimidation of students. I am impressed by the students’ equanimity in the video, perhaps because there’s a tradition of anti-Semitism that they’re simply used to. (That’s how I feel: I am saddened and depressed by anti-Semitism, but not tremendously angered, for it’s been a going concern for millennia.)
I was surprised to hear in the video that many in the BDS (Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions) movement against Israel have the explicit aim of eliminating the state of Israel, for I thought that its goal was simply to get Israel to agree to a two-state solution and remove its settlements from the West Bank. I guess I was wrong, for I asked Malgorzata about this and received this response:
There are videos of Omar Barghouti and other from BDS saying this in absolutely clear words. There is a video of Norman Finkelstein (of all people!) who says it openly and deplores it, accusing BDS movement of hypocrisy by fighting for something they are speaking openly about only among themselves and for being totally unrealistic because Israel is there to stay. So, yes, this is the goal of the founders and the core group of this movement. Moreover, at their every demonstration there are shouts: “From the River to the Sea, Palestine will be free”. Israel exists between “the River and the Sea”, so where is there a place for Israel? On all the maps they are presenting there is a “Palestine” written on the whole territory and no “Israel”. You can find the relevant videos all over YouTube.
sub
This is too depressing.
Worse. It’s terrifyingly scary. That is, if you’re a Jew who learned well the lessons of murderous antisemitic history. I recall being terrorized and attacked as a preschooler in Richmond, VA, as the 12 year old boy called my brother and me “damn Jews” and “dirty Jews.” I recall the rusty dart he threw into my shoulder one day and the punch he threw into my gut, leaving me doubled over, unable to breath, another day.
My god, that’s appalling! Imagine what the attacker’s parents & home environment must have been like. And I don’t mean to exculpate him in any way, just thinking about parents spreading hate like that.
I was told they were Nazis. This was around 1960.
So scary. Did you tell your parents?
It was my mother who told me, after going to the boy’s house to talk with his parents, to stop the bullying. She came back defeated, as they felt they had a right to attack Jews.
That must have just destroyed your mother. I mean, I’m sure she carried on, but the worst feeling in the world is sending your young kids out into it and having them slammed by its underbelly of bigotry, prejudice, racism, or any one of all the other hatreds.
Actually, that was the one time our mother signaled us to fight. My brother and I teamed up and took care of it, next time that bully came in our yard. Though bully was bigger than either of us and older than both of us together, we finally run him out of our yard, permanently.
Yay! I guess sometimes one has to tackle the offensive bigots on their own level.
I’m pissed off about the sexism of the other thread and now this. 🙁 Today’s my birthday damn it!
Happy Birthday, Diana. Take a break and enjoy it to the fullest!
Yeah, I give you permission to take a break from being pissed off until tomorrow. Happy birthday!
Thanks 🙂
Happy birthday from me, too!
🙂
Oh, I missed it! Late happy birthday!
That’s ok. Late thanks 🙂
Hippo birdie!
b&
😀
Many happy returns, Diana. You share a birthday with my father: he would have been 103 today.
Thanks!
Happy Birthday Diana! 🙂
Thanks
Happy birthday! Or as we in the Netherlands say: Gefeliciteerd!
Thanks!
Happy birthday 🙂
🙂
This is extremely saddening and disturbing. I’m shocked by the level of bias, abuse and lack of respect in those hallowed halls of higher learning, and by the thoughtless and reckless muzzling of free speech. I see what looks like mob hysteria and a dearth of objective and rational thinking.
Can you imagine if, instead of kefiyyahs, the BDS followers wore “brown shirts”?
About college campuses: I think you hit the nail on the head when you talked about “underdog status”.
On many campuses, significant percentage of the faculty and upper administration (deans, provosts, presidents) are Jewish, so there is some “background comfort” that Jewish concerns will be addressed.
Muslims are not nearly as well represented in the upper ranks.
Hence the double standard (IMHO)
The problem is that this attitude is pervasive off campus as well, at least among those nonbelievers who aren’t academics.
I don’t buy it. Protestants are ever better represented in high-level positions but that UCLA judicial council conversation would never have happened regarding a protestant.
Seems to me Jews very often get the short end of the stick in both directions – the christian mainsteam/majority will consider them ‘insiders’ able to take care of themselves when it comes to fighting bigotry against them, but will simultaneously consider them ‘outsiders’ when it comes to doling out the perks and positions.
I love the way Christians PC-ly tack on “Judeo” when they want to look less monopolistic. Judeo/Christian heritage–sure.
Mo always forgotten.
Now, if only he’d be gone, too….
b&
Atheist cartoonist Bill Mutt (Bill Mutrankowski) brilliantly illustrated this: Two men in t-shirts stand side by side. The short, silent one’s shirt says “Judeo-“. The tall, overbearing one’s says, “Christian.” With his arm controllingly around the short man’s shoulders, the tall man proudly states, in frame one, “Not only are we best friends, we’re the foundation of morality. Never forget it!” In frame two, covering his mouth with his hand, so only the short man will hear, he adds, “Right, Christ killer?”
LOL! Perfect!
If education is to accomplish a variety of improvements in those get it or are getting it, it must include the removal of bigoted and prejudicial ideas. When it does not do this it fails in one of the primary missions the education is about. This is why allowing teachers such as the one down at Southern Georgia University to teach at all is very bad.
The better schools and education in northern states was suppose to highlight and clarify this particular personal improvement. Could be this is another miss for our educational system. It’s a pretty good likelihood that kids in college with that kind of prejudice are bringing it from home. So the educational system has a job to get it out.
That is where critical reasoning and critical thinking come in. If colleges and universities are not teaching these critical skills, they might as well call themselves vocational schools, IMO.
They’re not teaching either. They’re pretty much just money sinks.
(Except for science departments, of course! 😀 )
This is the same sort of sentiment that Bill Nye seemed to be describing when he suggested Jews “get to know their neighbors”. As though the fact that Israel is referred to as the Jewish homeland made it understandable that their neighbors would question their loyalty, and cause them to be biased in favor of Israel.
On another note I had a Muslim making the argument the other day that they are far less likely to report hate crimes because they don’t want to draw the attention to themselves from law enforcement.
Here is a comment I found on the KCBS website:
“Here’s the offending students names:
Negeen Sadeghi-Movahed
Sofia Moreno Haq
Minghot Singh
Fabienne Roth
Interestingly enough, the first two are both Muslim and know each other well according to another UCLA Bruin article.”
That is interesting.
On the subject of Jews as a race from a genetic perspective, I’d be interested in a discussion of your thoughts on this subject. I’m not in the slightest bit an expert but I thought there was some positive evidence, e.g.
http://www.cell.com/AJHG/abstract/S0002-9297%2810%2900246-6
How can they arrest a student for expressing her opinion?!!!
Especially after she’d been given the floor and then blocked from being heard?! I think she and the student who picked up for her and was also arrested should both sue for false arrest and sue the university and its student government for that and for discrimination, as well, if that is legally possible. Any lawyers here who might know? I can’t see this sort of bad behavior stopping unless there are consequences to deter it.
Possibly this is not the question most would want to ask after looking at the video so I will. Why do these Institutions (colleges) allow most of this, such as it shows on Ohio State, UCLA and others?
It serves no purpose other than to distract from any real education and for that reason alone it should be stopped. I don’t think this is what they are paying for.
Besides, anyone who thinks they are going to solve the problems of the middle east on a college campus in the U.S. is delusional. It just doesn’t belong there.
I’ve never understood anti-Jewish sentiment. Jews have contributed perhaps proportionately more to the advancement of mankind when it comes to science and the arts then any population that comes to mind, they don’t proselytize and they don’ bother anyone. So why have they been so persecuted for so many centuries?
I thought bigotry against Jews in the U.S. has been waning, hate groups like neo-Nazis not withstanding, so it’s depressing to read the above.
To understand it, and its historical beginnings, try reading “Constantine’s Sword.” I’ve not yet read it, but I found the documentary based on it very informational. It goes by the same name. Honestly, as Jew who grew up learning about the subject, I thought I had the full gist of it. “Constantine’s Sword” was quite the eye opener.
Thanks for the tip.
“why have they been so persecuted for so many centuries?”
Envy, jealousy, inferiority complexes…
I’m just being glib, but sometimes those do seem to play a large part…
What better way to glue early Christians and potential Christians together than to give them a common enemy, a villian to hate, not just some imaginary Satan to fear, but a figure of real flesh and bone to attack and rip appart? Hence the claim that “the Jews killed Jesus”, back in Constantine’s era, and from that, the blood libels such as “Jews kill Christian babies for blood to make Passover matza.” History doesn’t even bother to count all the Jews murdered for such claims. I was personally targeted en mass by my 5th grade class in Maryland (circa 1966-67) for that “Jews killed Jesus” one, and they were spurred on by our teacher, who conveniently sat feet away at her desk pretending to see nothing, affording herself plausible deniability. The other 5th grade class had a Jew who was just as severely targeted, from what I could tell.
The Muslims took Christianity’s post-Constantine ways to a greater extreme, destroying or taking over and using others’ houses of worship, converting or killing, and that age-old useful and hateful targeting of Jews.
Jeezus! First Virginia, then Maryland. I’m not sure I even knew what anti-Semitism was back then. (I was 16-17, atheist but brought up Presbyterian, and grew up in Oregon.)
Yes, of course, the demonization goes way back. I suppose I meant that it only rankles some people all the more that despite centuries of prosecution, Jews not only still survive, they often excel.
*persecution*
We really had no choice: It’s a bit like that old 1960s feminist saying: “Women have to work twice as hard to be considered half as good as any man. Luckily for us, that’s not difficult.” The bravado aside, anyone could work as hard to break through the barriers of stereotypes, but those not blocked by the barriers simply don’t have to.
Yes, of course, you’re so right.
Goes all the way back to the Gospels, which’re virulently anti-semitic. “Brood of vipers,” Pharisees, the Sanhedrin flinging poo at a trial that breaks every rule they had, the scene outside the temple, the cursing of the Fig Tree (the symbol of Torah scholarship), and on and on and on.
It’s the same deal as with Orpheus. You don’t get more anti-Thracian than that story, even though Orpheus himself is ostensibly Thracian. But the whole thing is about the inner beauty of the true Hellenistic ideals shining through and triumphing over the barbarity of the backwoods hicks the hero unfortunately finds himself trapped amongst. And, if this particular damned dirty Thracian can overcome his unfortunate beginnings and achieve enlightenment, what’s your excuse, you damned dirty Thracian? Or are you on the side of the Orpheus killers?
b&
I am a person of very mixed ancestry. Perhaps there should be bigotry against such people. If there were, virtually everyone in the world would be targets of this bigotry because people of so-called races and cultures have been intermarrying since we became human. There is no pure race. Bigotry is more usually targeted against bigots’ stereotypical perceptions of people different from themselves.
I’ve had aboriginals in Canada tell me to go back where I came from. Since my family has been here on my dad’s side for a few generations – Scots Irish who were kicked out of Scotland, then kicked out of Northern Ireland then fled America during the American Revolution & my mom is from New Zealand and all mixed Europeans & Maori, I don’t know where that “back where I came from” would be. I figure Africa will get pretty crowded.
I take heart that the intervention of a faculty member persuaded the committee to unanimously voting her in. But what when that faculty member is pensioned off? Would these committee members really have learned their lesson? Would they promote the stance of that faculty member? Or would they descend again into racism and bigotry?
Sorry, I do not know how that comment was doubled and it was not a reply to you, Diana.
My reply to you is: well, Scotland is not that bad, if you ignore the weather and the Muslim take-over of the inner cities (well I do not really know if in Scotland this take-over is as bad as in, say, Belgium).
Seriously though, that was rather nasty.
As a European immigrant in South Africa, I’ve *never* been admonished/dissed that way. And I don’t need to point out that race relations here are not the easiest on our planet. However, I’ve always made felt to be welcome.
Really nasty, I feel for you.
Diana, tell them to take a walk back across the Bering Strait to Siberia.
Native Americans (as we call them in the US) don’t believe that they came from Siberia. That was just a lie made up by the white man. The Natives believe that they were always here, or they came from the center of the earth via a whole in the Grand Canyon, or some other nonsense.
A “hole” in the Grand Canyon, not “whole.”
“…the veneer is clearly anti-Israel, but the core motivations are anti-Semitic.”
This is something I suspected too, not always and ever, but way too often. I think you are spot on there.
I take heart that the intervention of a faculty member persuaded the committee to unanimously voting her in. But what when that faculty member is pensioned off? Would these committee members really have learned their lesson? Would they promote the stance of that faculty member? Or would they descend again into racism and bigotry?
And what about the obvious bias of the very councim members who meant to exclude her on grounds that she might have a bias? Shouldn’t they resign or at least recuse themselves permanently?
Exactly!
I also take heart that Atheists are the *least* targeted in that graph. Is that true? I gathered that atheists were the most despised group in the US.
Am I missing something?
Atheists, statistically, are the second most despised group in the US. They’re just beaten by Muslims. However, when someone actually knows an atheist, their opinion changes completely – there is a more than 30 % point range between the opinion of those who (think they) don’t know any atheists and those that do. So we don’t get beaten up. Jews are popular in national surveys because of the numerical dominance of the Christian Right, who rate Jews extremely highly (and atheists and Muslims very low).
The difference is on college campuses, where the Palestine lobby is extremely strong and dominates other voices to the extent that they’re comfortable openly expressing the most appalling bigotry.
Heather, I’m not sure I fully understand what you are saying.
However, I’m sure I still don’t understand why atheists are (second) most despised, but still least targeted.
I mean, if you *know* a jew, you still want to beat him/her up, but if you *know* an atheist this aggression disappears? Does that make sense?
I’m still mystified.
The anti-Semitism seems to be concentrated in small areas like college campuses. Those people egg each other on, hyping each other up. It’s like a gang mentality. They cease to see Jews as people, only as representatives of ideas they don’t like, and that enables them to commit acts most wouldn’t be capable of on their own.
It’s different from what’s going on in the general population, where the gangs are different and fighting about different things. Lots of churches, for example, preach hatred of LGBT people, but most also preach not resorting to physical violence. (Of course, the damage done by other forms of violence is huge.)
I’m not sure that I’ve explained it very well, so let me know if I’m not making any sense.
Where’s Sastra? She’s much better at explaining this stuff than me!
I vaguely get your point, but it still mystifies me.
Why single out jews, who are less hated than atheists, for actual physical violence? More concentrated hatred on campuses? You maybe right, but I cannot really buy it.
I seriously think there is something not ‘right’ there, in the sense that the facts do not add up.
I’m sure we’re missing something, but I haven’t a clue what.
Heather, I’m not sure I understand you completely.
However, I’m sure I do not understand why the (second) most despised group, atheists, are targeted least.
I mean, if I *know* a Jew, I would still like to beat him/her up, but if I *know* an atheist these compulsions disappear?
It does not make much sense to my modest thinking frame.
Now *again* I do not know how my comment was doubled.
I think I’l call it a day…
It’s also about perception. You think atheists are evil, but then you meet one and discover they’re just like everyone else. Among these anti-Jewish groups on campus, the environment is not there for people to get to know one another, and the ignorance persists.
Remember, that graph isn’t showing people’s opinions of the various groups, its showing incidents of actual crimes committed against them. So I think part of those statistics are likely explained by groups like the KKK and white supremacists. These groups are antisemitic, and unlike your average college student or even christian anti-atheist fundie, they include lots of people who will actually commit crimes in the course of following their ideology. So if someone tells me synagogues are attacked more often than atheist organization buildings, I would not be at all surprised.
…percentage of incidents recognised by the police as actual religiously-motivated hate crimes?
That data has been through a number of filters, I wonder if anti-atheist bias could have been one of them?
Atheists can also blend in well and be in the closet. It’s psychologically painful and isolating but when atheists fear for their jobs or lives, they will just hide.
There was an incident years back, before the New Atheists where an atheist was beaten up on a campus while putting up atheist literature for people to join an atheist group. I recall the authorities just laughed when the atheist asked that it be considered a hate crime. I wish I could recall the details.
It also helps that religion is often considered one of those taboo subjects. It generally doesn’t even come up in the settings I find myself in unless the people talking have sent the appropriate “dog whistle” signals that they have a shared interest. And if somebody is being boorish and trying to drag you into a religious discussion and you don’t want to have anything to do with it, it’s usually easy to recycle one of those “never discuss politics, religion, or driving skills” jokes to stay out of it. (Amongst musicians, substitute “intonation” for “driving skills,” for example.)
I know there’re parts of the country where one of the first questions strangers ask is some variation on, “So, what church do you go to?” but I’ve never spent any time in one. If you wanted to stay closeted, you could probably get away with, “Haven’t picked one,” graciously acknowledge the inevitable invitation to the asker’s own church, and never manage to follow through on it. Of course, it’s not hard to imagine how things could get rather sticky after a while in such a setting, especially if it’s a small community. If I wanted to stay in the closet in such an area, I’d probably try to hide amongst the Unitarians or, if especially desperate, the United Church of Christ. Mostly, I’d look to escape, period.
b&
The Israeli/Palestinian situation is so complicated, I guarantee 95% of 18 year olds yelling about it don’t know what they’re yelling about, and the other 5% are liars.
I am completely appalled that anyone who has anything to do with academia would consider it appropriate to ban speakers etc from Israeli universities. I was pleased to hear the bloke from Harvard speak against that.
I too was unaware that the BDS movement wanted Israel completely gone.
I also wonder if the laws in places like France and Germany that ban Holocaust denial are playing a minor part. It forces the racists towards anti-Zionism, and gives that revolting idea air it might not have got otherwise.
I’m feeling completely incapable of expressing myself with much coherence, let alone eloquence. Being confronted by such hatred has left me very disturbed and it’s not even directed at me. It does involve us all though – humanity collectively still has a lot to learn even in supposedly advanced democracies.
Oops… my response (#18) below was meant as a question to you in particular. Not to Jerry. (Jerry; I hope you read this too and realise I merely screwed up the nesting.)
A quick question: what is anti-Zionism?
I would probably have classified myself as an anti-Zionist, but that’s largely because I think of Zionism as the movement leading to the formation of Israel – basically, the propostion, as held before 1948, that “forming a specifically Jewish state in Palestine, or perhaps somewhere else, would be a good idea.”
Well, I disagree with this: I think it was a terrible idea (although I probably would have supported it myself in 1948, for the same bad reasons that other people did). At no point in history, and on no part of the Earth’s surface, and for no group of people, is this kind of ethnic nation-forging a good idea. I would have thought this makes me as anti-Zionist as they come.
But I also hold that both Zionism and anti-Zionism are entirely academic positions now. The state of Israel exists, and we have to take the world as we find it, not as it ought to have been had things been done differently 77 years ago. My own country – Australia – also ought never to have been: European settlers ought not to have taken this land. And that’s also an academic question. We should recognise that it’s true, but it doesn’t immediately get us anywhere.
I presume (I hope) you don’t think my position is “revolting” – so I’m curious what you mean by “anti-Zionism”, and if my understanding of the term is a crazy one.
Your understanding is the same as mine, and technically, I’m an anti-Zionist too – my position isn’t anti-Semitic though, but anti-creating-a-state-for-a-particular-religious-group. Here’s the Wikipedia link to Zionism: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Zionism
and anti-Zionism: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Anti-Zionism
I think anti-Semites have co-opted the term anti-Zionism as an excuse for anti-Semitism. They are not making the distinction that’s in my mind, and outside an audience I didn’t think could understand the difference I would never even mention the subject for fear of any of my arguments being used against Jews or Israelis.
Israel exists, and I don’t think we can or should go back. We need a two state solution. Also, because of what Jews have suffered, there’s an humanitarian case for the state of Israel imo.
My position is pretty much the same as that of Sam Harris. It’s complicated, and he’s a better writer than me, so here’s a link to what he says: http://www.samharris.org/blog/item/why-dont-i-criticize-israel
Does that mean that no one can criticize Israel without being called an antisemite? I think Israel is a belligerent nation that treats Palestinians badly. I don’t want to dissolve the state of Israel, and the people there have the right to live in their country freely.
Two answers:
1. Everyone can criticize Israel. Israelis do it all the time! That’s the freedom Israel allows (and its neighbors do not).
2. If Israel were to dissolve, what do you think would replace it?
a. A shiny new democracy where everyone is treated equally, including women — and even Jews? Because, right now, in Israel, there are Muslim politicians voted into office and Muslim members of the nation’s Supreme Court. There are even Muslims in the military, though they are not required, as Jews are, to serve time there. Would Jews be allowed in the military of whatever would replace Israel?
b. Perhaps the void would be filled as a new node in the network of violent Islamic extremism, after several such groups literally battle it out to see who owns that node. (See how Hamas came to be in charge of Gaza, when Israel left that void, and how the Muslim Brotherhood was voted into Egypt’s presidency, literally next door…)
I think those who do not live in Israel, both Jews and non-Jews, should be very cautious in criticizing Israel.
In my youth, I thought Israel was treating Palestinians badly and was obliged to retreat to its pre-1967 borders.
Later, gradually, mainly through the deeds of Palestinian terrorists (who, sadly, seem to have the support of the majority of their population), I changed my opinion.
I see that Israel is under existential threat by its Palestinian and other neighbors. I am appalled when the response of Israel after shelling from Gaza or Lebanon (i.e. Hizbullah) is invariably called by the international community “disproportionate”. What does this mean? Those saying it imply that there is a threshold of Israeli (i.e. Jewish) deaths by rocket shelling that must be exceeded so that Israel can legitimately react with full force to stop the shelling. Nobody tells what this threshold is, and no matter how many Israelis are killed and maimed, they are always considered too few.
Would any of us non-Israelis tolerate a neighbor firing rockets into our territory?
I also see that fewer and fewer countries remain where Jewish lives truly matter. Because members of Mideast nations who are indoctrinated to support killing of Jews form large diasporas in Europe and elsewhere; and instead of losing their extremist views in their new host countries, they successfully convert locals to their views, as in US campuses. I fear that killings of Jews as happened recently in France and Denmark will only become more often.
As for retreat to the pre-1967 borders – I am no military expert, but people who are have told me that these borders are indefensible.
Well said, I agree with everything you say.
In my callow East Tennessee high school days, I had a chum who said his dad had “jewed down” the price of a car at a car lot. I knew next to nothing about the history of the Jews, except what I cam across attending the righteous Southern Baptist church. Of course, the fact is that no one is more confident of his bargaining powers than a righteous Southern Baptist conducting business during the week.
Some years later I imagined asking my chum whether it were not at least as, if not more, accurate to describe his father’s bargaining prowess as having “Baptisted” or “Christianed” the car salesman down on the price.
I heard the expression in North Dakota, where there are so few Jews, there isn’t even one rabbi in the entire state, and I don’t know whether the one synagogue still in use 12 years ago continues in use, today. The person who said it didn’t mean to be antisemitic, so I told her that:
1. Hundreds of years ago, the Church decided Jews could not own land or work many of the usual trades, making it hard to support their families. At the same time, it prohibited Christians from lending money for interest. Therefore, it set up a system in which Jews had to do the lending — and then, blamed Jews for being money lenders.
2. Also hundreds of years ago, a major Jewish philosopher (Moses Maimonides) came up with 8 levels of charity. Going up the list, there were increasing levels of anonymity, so as to protect the recipient from the embarassment of feeling like a beggar and to protect the giver from feeling badly, too (something akin to “survivor’s guilt”). Jews are very charitable. They just tend to do it anonymously. The 8th/highest level, of course, is to help someone back on his/her feet so they no longer need to ask for money.
P.S. At the time this happened, she hadn’t even realized she’d used the word “Jew” because it was such a commonly (read: thoughtlessly) used expression. Weeks later, she approached me to say she heard her daughter use it, realized she hadn’t used it anymore, and told her daughter to stop it, too. Good education should always be so contagious!
I sense that many people know nothing about Jews and Judaism except a few memes promoted through Christian channels, especially when promoting “Judeo-Christian” anything, as though Judaism is Christianity-light (no Jesus) or Christianity-heavy (no Jesus’ love, just violence and genocide of others).
That is why I bring it up a lot: To add a bit of real knowledge of Jewish culture, where I can.
Conc0rdance did a recent video about race and mentioned, among others, Jews. He rightly included the concept of culture. I don’t mean to proselytize. I’m an atheist, for truth’s sake. But Jewish culture (and, hence, Jews and Judaism) are not like either Christianity or Islam. Islam learned from Christianity, and Christianity used Judaism to claim a foundation, but that claim is suspect, when one looks at what each of these three has done in the past 2,000 years.
The BDS movement could not possibly have grown so fast and become so organized as a real grass roots organization.
I attended a closed professional meeting, once, only to learn that there are companies which take small groups through a process in order to develop like that and make it look like grass roots. It ain’t cheap, either.
So, who’s really behind all this? Where’s the money coming from?
@ Henry Fitzgerald (18)
People always lived in groups with common language, common symbols and the feeling of belonging. This developed into nations. The alternative is multinational empires. They were tried through the history. Roman Empire, Ottoman Empire, Austro-Hungarian Empire etc. Groups/nations swallowed by such empires wanted to be independent. One might dislike this propensity of people to wish to live in countries where the majority shares the same language, symbols etc. but looking at the world today and at the history, that was always the case. Jewish nation was forcibly removed from their country by en empire. Some remained, some tried to return century after century, and were removed again by consecutive empires. When empires started to crumble and the persecution of dispersed Jews intensified (especially in Russia and parts of Arab world, like Yemen) Jews joined the movement of many peoples in the world demanding their own states and the right to rule themselves. This movement of national liberation is called Zionism. Now, the argument that Zionism and anti-Zionism are academic positions today, so many decades after establishing of the State of Israel would be valid if not millions upon millions people who want to destroy this Jewish state. This month University of Southampton (U.K.) will hold a “scholarly” debate about the legitimacy of Israel. Which other of the countries established after the collapse of empires was ever discussed in this manner? Jordan? Poland? Lebanon? Lithuania? No, just the one in the world Jewish state. And this is just one tiny, marginal example – and quite peaceful at that. Voices and movements in the Arab and Muslim countries crying for destruction of Israel are much more aggressive. That is why neither Zionism nor anti-Zionism can be just academic position. BTW, Zionism in 19th and the first part of 20th century was a national liberation movement, lead by secular people but encompassing many different political and religious stream. A Jewish state was and is understood as a state of Jewish nation, which means with a Jewish majority and diverse minorities, but not as a state of the believers in Judaism. I suppose that the fact that Judaism is the religion of one nation only, Jews, makes people misunderstand this.
And about the idea of establishing an independent state with a Jewish majority: it was a wonderful idea. Pity that it came so late. After Conference in Evian 1938, when no country wanted to take German Jews and give them a shelter, Nazis concocted their plan of “Final Solution”. Had Israel existed then those Jews nobody wanted would have a safe haven. The same is valid today.
Brava, Malgorzata! Well framed, well reasoned, and well put. Thank you for that.
I am Israeli and I completely agree.
Also, anti-Israeli positions are often a politically correct version of antisemitism.
This is bad not only because antisemitism is bad, but also because it has a considerable influence on how we conduct ourselves as a nation. This makes dismissing any criticism as antisemitism very easy and strengthens a sense of “the world is against us”, which in turn leads to more hawkish attitude.
I wonder how this boycotting can even be legal.
The corporation I work for gives us regular training in legal issues that might apply to our jobs and one thing they say repeatedly: boycotting (directly or indirectly through lack of action etc) ANY country not on the government’s restricted list is a crime. The employee can be imprisoned, the company can be fined. One of the examples involved Israeli businesses and products. Even something as simple as guaranteeing that a product was not made in Israel was considered a violation.
How do academics and students get away with this
Speaking of pissed off, Diana, since when is atheism a damn religious group, as the table states ?! GRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRRR
Since zero was a number.
Both those who favor Israeli politics as those who oppose it should make the distinction between Israel and Jews. Both sides make this mistake and on both sides there are people who do this on purpose.
Same with Arabs and Muslims btw.
Perhaps the problem lies with the amount of identity politics found in the US? I rarely met an American who just introduces himself as an American instead referring to themselves as hyphonated Americans. At least to me that seems to be a real obstacle for a peaceful coexistence based on a shared identity. Especially if what comes before the hyphon is somehow more valued and mied with some ancestral pride.
As for BDS, it seems that it is a very split group of people. Some using it as a Trojan Horse for antisemitism whilst others like Max Blumenthal are ready to call out antisemitism where they see it (e.g. recent demonstrations against Israel in Germany where a lot of people with Arab/Muslim background upheld signs with antisemitic propaganda).
Regarding the charge of dual loyalty, I want to ask this question: Is the charge of dual loyalty per se always antisemitic when quite a few American Jews decide to serve in the IDF and seem to apply a different moral standard when it comes to Israel? Why is it that almost any campus has a Jewish group full of liberal middle-class Jews that fervently advertises for/defends Israel whereas the same people usually do not organise to fight Anti-Americanism (the other part of their identity)that is coming from almost any other part of the world (That is not to say that a good portion of criticism towards the US is not justified!)?
“I rarely met an American who just introduces himself as an American instead referring to themselves as hyphonated Americans.”
Have you mostly been in the urban northeast? Because I really don’t think that’s very common for most Americans.
I have met most Americans in Europe (UK, Germany, my stays in the US have been too short) as students or young people travelling the world. As all of them have been white, going back to their ancestral roots might have sparked the hyphonisation coupled with the slight embarrassment they felt coming from the US led by Bush.
Be that as it may, but the point still stands. It is undeniable that especially among minorities (Latinos, Mexican-Americans, etc.) an additional sense of identity is very common, even if they have no real ties to the country of their parents. Now this might be a reaction to discrimination against them but I would argue that despite the discrimination it is still better to fully embrace your new identity. I see the same phenomenon here in Germany and I think it is very detrimental for the cohesion of society if a sense of commonality just consists in working for the GDP of the country.
But my main point/question was another one. I want to ask Jerry directly. Apart from straight antisemitism which usually does not care about the difference between Jews/Israelis, where does Israel get an unjustifiedly bad press? Allow me to say that outlets like facebook and twitter do not count since its users are both limited by a certain number of characters, their own character, and their intellect (It also skews the image as to what counts as bad press as almost anyone can post there).
Israel under Netanyahu is after all continuously pushing for an American war with Iran, the human rights situation in Israel is abysmal, it is a society full of racism (not only against Arabs) and one you certainly would not want to live in. In other words what is your beef with people like Finkelstein and Chomsky factually (I can see that one is easily annoyed by their conduct and thinly veiled pomposity)?
It might be that you as a member of the academy have access to more radical views against Israel or that student organisations tend to lose their calm when discussing topics they feel enthusiastic about. But the main outlets in the US (Post and especialy the Times) are still very much concerned with dampening the PR-crisis of Israel.
http://mondoweiss.net/2014/10/another-reporters-israeli
Granted the linked blog is in the comment section often really full of vitriol, but based on the content of the article alone, one has both reason to suspect that Israel often gets a pass and that there might be even an conflict of interest for some reporters at the NYT.
This of course in no way excuses the behaviour of the UCLA council as it seems that they assumed outright that any Jew has a conflict of interest and is incapable of objectivity reagarding Israel.
@Sander Aarts
Well, the line gets blurred mostly by Israeli politicians that proclaim to speak for all the Jews (usually with the remark that Israel is the safe haven for Jews all over the world).
For centuries people easily believed the most outlandish monstrosities about Jews: Jews killed God, Jews kill Christian children for matzos, Jews poison wells, Jews cause Black Death, Jews are striving to rule the world, Jews caused both World Wars, Jews own (or at least influence) media etc. After Holocaust it was no longer fashionable to blame Jews for all ills and evils in the world, at least among enlightened and civilized people. But such ideas, which were vivid through centuries and changed only in order to blame Jews for the evil prevalent in a given epoch, die hard. So Israel took place of Jews and became a Jew of the nations. Facts do not count, people are willing to believe every lie disseminated first by Nazis who found shelter in Arab countries, then by Soviet propaganda, and then by “human rights” defenders. It would take a book to list them all. I will take just a few most recent examples: last week many serious media outlet (The Guardian, AFP, among others) informed the world that Israel opened dams on Negev to cause a flood in Gaza. No journalist bothered to check the information given to them by Hamas. No editor had the shortest moment of hesitation, it was published. And then Israel said and presented aerial pictures: there are no dams in Negev or anywhere in vicinity of Gaza which could have been open. So this lie was shortlived though I’m sure it will return because exactly the same story was published a few years ago during heavy downpour in Gaza. Also last week The Guardian published a story about Mossad trying to dry the Nile river by planting special water thirsty plants. To their credit they wrote that they were not sure this was the truth, but, who knows with Mossad? The lie about killing of Mohamed Al-Dura, the lie about massacre in Jenin, the lie about apartheid in Israel, the lie about mistreatment of Israeli Arabs, the lie about genocide, the lie that Israeli soldiers deliberately aim at civilians, the lie that Netanyahu wants war with Iran, the list is endless. Just during session 2014-15 UN General Assembly adopted 20 resolutions against Israel and 3 against the rest of the world. If we look at the world during those month, with Syria, Russia, ISIS, North Korea etc. this seems a bit unbalanced. The same proportions of condemning Israel versus condemning the rest of the world can be found in Human Right Watch, Amnesty International, Human Rights Council and untold other organizations. Unfortunately, “Mondoweiss” belong to those who swallow every lie about Israel and disseminate it with vigour.
Sorry Malgorzata, but you mix some very interesting facts with falsehoods. I also do not see the point of rehearsing the well-known history of antisemitism.
You are right in calling out the editorial shortcomings of the Guardian and other (European) newspapers, but more relevant would have been to show that American news outlets got fooled by Pallywood as the focus is on American campuses. Anyway, thanks for the info, I did not know that.
At least in the case of Mohamed Al-Dura, the truth came to light and got the deserved attention. People who heard the story eventually got to know the truth.
I don’t know whether you have ever met or even talked to an Israeli Arab but I find it astounding if not downright dishonest to claim that Arabs are are not mistreated in Israel. Of course, you can always point to some token Arabs in the Knesset but that would be just as silly as claiming that the Republican party has the best interests in mind for African-Americans since they once elected Michael Steele as their leader. Society and its social life is more than just a parliament and the politics that surrounds it.
And to claim that Netanyahu has no interest in a war with Iran is just as silly. Do you expect him to bluntly admit it, write a detailed confession? I doubt that you approach the plain semantic content of any other politician’s speech with the same naivete.
As to the “Israel gets press worse than Russia, China and North Korea” complaint. This is true, China and North Korea are much worse Human Rights violators. But they were probably even worse during a time that South Africa was an Apartheid state, yet people in the West were quite outspoken about South Africa, more so than about the crimes of other states. Media attention tends to be selective and in the case of South Africa it amounted to such lengths that finally the South African government came under pressure. Now this is indeed to some extend unfair, but I somehow doubt that you had any issues with this perceived unfairness. It is just that this time something that you like gets criticised.
I grant you even this: there are some people criticising Israel with valid arguments that yet inwardly are very happy that they finally have an opportunity to say something nasty against Jews (by saying something about Israelis). But does that really invalidate the argument? It certainly puts into question their integrity and it might make things even more unbalanced as to what injustice gets more press coverage but at least for me it does not invalidate their argument one bit. For there are also people who criticise Israel with the right arguments for the right reasons.
Second, the political influence of the West upon Israel is so much higher than it is upon China and North Korea that it is reasonable to ask whether one should not divert attention to issues that one can more easily resolve, especially when it comes to military and political allies.
Furthermore, as opposed to China and North Korea, Israel (at least outwardly) presents itself as a bastion of Western values in an area where gays, atheists and others are oppressed. But Western Liberal values are a package deal just as democracy for men only is not democracy.
You must be joking about American press being free from Pallywood. AP killing the story of Israeli peace proposal (read Matti Friedman: http://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2014/11/how-the-media-makes-the-israel-story/383262/ ); NYT publishing the story of the baby Omar Masharawi and refusing to publish the truth; Jodi Rudoren writing that all talk about Hamas pressing the journalists during the last summer war in Gaza was nonsense, repeating false numbers of killed civilians, etc. etc. NYT also published the story of Jenin massacre, of Al-Dura, of an Israeli policeman who was beating a bleeding and defenseless Palestinian (the bleeding and defenseless man was a Jew, just beaten to pulp by Palestinians and the policeman was standing over him, with his truncheon high, trying to save his life).
And I wonder if you ever read people like Bassem Eid, Khaled Abu Toameh, Mudar Zahran. I could continue this list of names, there are many Palestinians and Israeli Arabs who are not in Knesset (Ms Zoabi is, and if you listen to her, no state in the world persecutes its minorities as much as Israel) and who can see that the only country in the Middle East where Arabs have equal rights is Israel. You should check the rights of Palestinian Arabs in Lebanon, Jordan, Syria.
In every society there exist some discrimination of the minorities – it exists in Poland and in U.S., in France and in Argentina. The question is what the law says and what the authorities do about it. In Israel the law states that all citizens are equal and the authorities, intellectual elite, educators work against any form of racism and against discrimination. You should not demand that Israel, to the last Jewish inhabitant should be an upstanding, tolerant, loving minorities angel. They are not. Like every human society in the world they have their share of criminals, bigots and idiots. But those people do not constitute majority and they are frown upon.
Sorry, but I think what is silly is to imagine that any Israeli politician wants war. Netanyahu doesn’t want war. He is faced with a regime of religious fanatics who repeat time and again that Israel must be annihilated. People who repeat it are the highest officials of this country and now they are close to nuclear weapon. For years Netanyahu and his cabinet tried to convince the world that sanctions against Iran must be real and really biting, so that either this regime falls or it stops its nuclear program. But, yes, if nothing else would stop Iran from acquiring nuclear bomb, Netanyahu is willing to bomb – not towns and civilians, but the nuclear installation, if his army experts would say that this is feasible.
You misquote me. I was not talking of “Israel gets press worse than Russia, China and North Korea”. I was talking about the highest international authorities and the most “moral” international organizations – not about press. UN, HRC, HRW, IA – their task is to see to human right violation, no matter where they are committed, and to work against them. But the bulk of their time is taken by Israel. 20 resolutions of UNGA in one session against 3 for all the other countries in the world? And one of those resolution was submitted by Syria and was about the violation of the human rights of Golan’s Arabs! If it weren’t so tragic it would be the most comical thing of the year. UN duly condemned Israel for that.
Western liberal values are a package deal, you say. I just wonder if U.S. and all upstanding democracies in Europe would pass your test with flying colors if they were in Israel’s situation: surrounded by hostile countries (even population of Egypt and Jordan, in spite of peace treaties, is in big part hostile. Jordanian parliament in November 2014 observed moment of silence to honor the two murderers who with meat cleavers hacked to death four people in the Jerusalem synagogue); three times attacked by multiple Arab armies; with terrorists trying to kill as many civilians as they can manage. It is easy to be democratic and liberal if your neighbor is Switzerland or Canada.
And yes, I think that the history of anti-Semitism is relevant because as easily as people believed lies about Jews and repeated to each other the horror stories about their nefarious intentions, so they do today about Israel.
Malgorzata, a couple of points:
I did not say that the American press is free from Pallywood, I asked for specific examples, because in general I think it is less prone to fall into this trap than say, the Guardian.
I am kind of torn, on the one hand you provide interesting facts and a new side to the issues but then you spout the usual nonsense. Arabs enjoying equal rights in Palestine is pure bullshit and to claim otherwise is an outright lie. I am baffled how removed from reality one can be. I have been to Israel only once, but the racism was very tangible, especially if you talked to younger Israelis. I know Palestinian students from Bethlehem that tell me about the constant harrassment they endure, be it at checkpoints or in other daily life situations. And to argue that the legal text says otherwise is quite frankly meaningless. The law in itself has no power, it has to be upheld as well. But as I will show you, even the law allows discrimination.
You say this:
“In every society there exist some discrimination of the minorities – it exists in Poland and in U.S., in France and in Argentina. The question is what the law says and what the authorities do about it. In Israel the law states that all citizens are equal and the authorities, intellectual elite, educators work against any form of racism and against discrimination.”
So far so good. But the reality is unfortunately different. It is the law: I know evil mondoweiss, not good JerusalemPost, but where is it factually incorrect?
http://mondoweiss.net/2014/09/allowing-discrimination-palestinians
The same does not happen in Western Europe or the US but it does happen in Israel. To deny it is to deny reality.I mean the list is so long. Arab municipalities not receiving the same funding, etc. What does count as discrimination in your eyes?
You continue:
“You should not demand that Israel, to the last Jewish inhabitant should be an upstanding, tolerant, loving minorities angel. They are not. Like every human society in the world they have their share of criminals, bigots and idiots. But those people do not constitute majority and they are frown upon.”
A lame mix of commonplace tropes and denial of the reality. No sane person demands it, only antisemites do. It is also frankly not so important how many people dicriminate actively, important is what others do against it and to what extend discrimination happens and is tolerated. One schoolyard bully is more than enough to make one’s life miserable if the teachers ignore it, you don’t need an army of them.
When it comes to Iran, I frankly do not share your worries. Do you really think they would be as stupid to attack the strongest military power in the region? Not only that, Iran would be flattened by the USA as well. Hell, even those lefties in Europe would send help. Granted, it is easy to downplay the Iranian danger for Israel writing from Europe, but I honestly think those threats are just posturing. A dropping of a Nuclear bomb on foreign soil happened only once and it was a situation where the US knew that retaliation of similar proportion was impossible.
And why is it that even the Israel intelligence service contradicts Netanyahu bomb claims? Granted the following is a guardian article but the statements come from someone I trust more than you when it comes to assessing Israel’s safety:
http://www.theguardian.com/world/2015/feb/27/mossad-binyamin-netanyahu-meir-dagan-israel
As to the skewed vision of the UN. Yes, other countries are much worse. And it is clear what the motivation behind those resolutions is. But according to this logic, we could not arrest burglars as long as there are murderers out there. Do you really think that? Yes, it is a sign of wrong moral priorities, but it might be that those wrong moral priorities lead our attention to those few problems we can actually solve? Think about it this way: better fucked up priorities that at least help some people than no priorities. And frankly, Israel is not important enough so as to block all criticism like China, Russia or the US can. The UN is an organ of selective justice for those who can enforce it. But better only justice regionally enforced than no justice at all. In the long run, I honestly believe that those societies under the scrutiny of the UN and similar institutions fare better than those constantly aoviding justice. The quality of life in China would surely rise if they had a free press and free elections.
Your last argument is also not very convincing. I do not know how I would have acted during the Nazi regime, it is very likely that I either had not the encourage to fight it or that I would have participated in its crimes. But to argue that therefore I cannot criticise my forefathers because I probably would have acted the same is bullshit. Demanding such high a standard for criticism more or less eliminates it in total. Similar things apply to states. True, Germany might just invade its neighbouring countries in a similar situation. But how does that bar me as a German or the German gouvernment from pointing certain things out when it comes to Israel? The contrary is the case. This privilege of not facing the same situation and therefore having no interest to defend my own (similar) practice indirectly by defending that of Israel, allows one to see things clearer. Just as a judge can over a case in which he himself in somehow involved.
And how does being surrounded by hostile countries justify or even explain the discrimination of large parts of the population inside the coutry? It certainly sets constraints like conscription and to some extent curtails personal freedom for those that have to serve. But why is it that those free from mandatory conscription somehow enjoy even less personal freedom. I mean, if the playing field was level except for conscription you would expect less moaning and complaining from those who do not serve?
Under a post about anti-Semitism shown at one of U.S. universities you started a discussion about the faults and crimes of Israel. I do not think this is the right place to do it. So just a few short points in answer to your analysis of Israel.
1. Israel takes 0,01% of the Earth surface, its population is 8 millions (world’s population is over 7 billions) and this sliver of land and tiny fraction of humanity is the focus of fear, loathing and condemnation of the world. Israel can boast with the highest density of foreign journalists in the world, greatest amount of articles, analysis, condemnations by international organizations, by NGO, by readers. 2012 CNN published an article about shooting down of a drone over Israel, another about 20 people killed in Syria, and yet another about 4 people killed in Baghdad. Number of readers comments: to Syria – 4; to Bagdad -5; to Israel – over 3.600. If you watch any country under such an electronic microscope every pimple seems like a huge cancerous tumor. Your statement: “But better only justice regionally enforced than no justice at all” doesn’t seem to me like a cry for justice but like a cry “Let’s single out this country for opprobrium”.
2. How nice of American media to lie about Israel less often than The Guardian.
3. Maybe you would like to see what Jerusalem Post thinks about the court ruling described by the Mondoweiss.
4. Iran: Yes, it is very easy to dismiss a threat when you are thousands of kilometers away and the threat is not directed against you. Israelis do not have this luxury. Watch those threats (and this is just a fraction of the available material) and try to imagine that they are directed against you:
The Iranian Regime Threatens the U.S. and Israel on Iranian TV (you just have to close the Polish subtitles)
IRGC Navy Commander Ali Fadavi Presents New “Strategic” Weapon and Says: We Have Deterred America</a
Iranian General Salami: We Tested Sinking Aircraft Carriers with Cruise and Ballistic Missile
Revolution Day 2015 In Iran: A Regime-Organized Display Of Hatred For U.S., Obama
I do not have time and this is not the place to answer your accusations of racism and systemic discrimination against Israeli Arabs. As a lifelong member of a minority (in three countries: Poland, Sweden and Britain) I do know what discrimination is. And I do know that in a situation when close to 20% of Israel’s population are members of the 366 million strong Arab nation which is overwhelmingly hostile to Israel and Jews, which expelled practically whole Jewish populations which lived in their countries for millennia, and whose members are almost daily attacking Israeli Jews, Israel treats this minority in an admirable way. But it is always lousy to be a minority, ask the Roma living in Poland, ask the German minority living in Poland or Roma and Polish minorities in Germany, do not single out the one Jewish country in the world.
About “discrimination” in Israel against Arab citizens: there are affirmative action programs there for Arabs. Is that widely known? Would that ever happen in an Arab country for Jews (assuming any Jews are left in the given Arab country)? One of the reasons for Israeli Arabs being less well off than their Jewish neighbors is that Arab women are less likely to go out to work, whereas Jewish couples (excluding the ultra Orthodox) tend to have double incomes.
About Palestinians being treated as equal citizens: http://youtu.be/etXAm-OylQQ?t=40m39s
Well, Israel is a democracy. There are many voices. Here is another one of Israel’s vice ambassador to Norway George Deek, an Arab.
Him telling you what you want to hear doesn’t make him “an honest” Israeli.
It actually makes him a person who is distorting reality to serve his political agenda.
In the West Bank, which is not part of Israel, the Israeli law is not in effect, in the same way that American law is not in effect in Afghanistan and was not in Iraq. In Israel, however, Arabs are treated equally.
1. Your comments are too long (see Da Roolz). It appears to be a bullying tactic (though I forget its specific name) in which a debator floods his opponent with a tremendous number of points, right or wrong, in order to overwhelm and subdue. A fair debate doesn’t require such steamroller tactics.
2. I’ve been to Israel, spoken with Arab Israelis, on the street, in the hospital, and in their homes. I’ve seen them being treated with the exact same quality of care as the nonArab Israelis. Neither religion nor geographic origin made any difference.
3. I saw only one apparent difference in care: A middle-aged woman with bruises, lying on a stretcher in the ER, in the midst of a mass casualty incident, was not receiving any immediate attention. Though she otherwise appeared okay, I asked someone about her. The answer: She was an Arab whose husband had beaten her, and she would not bring charges, so there was little they could do but let her lie there and rest while taking care of the double car-bombing victims flooding in.
+1 — No, make that +18.
I’ve been an American for 65 years. I don’t remember ever introducing myself as a hyphenated American. I don’t think I’m uncommon in the least.
I’ve been an American for just as long and I can tell you that the claim that we introduce ourselves as hypthenated is just silly. What am I–a “Jewish-Amerian”???? That claim is just wrong.
I’ve lived next to Americans all my life & have Americans as relatives and I agree.
Now in Canada, people don’t even say they’re Canadian. In fact, I think I saw a funny “only in Canada” thing that said how if you replied that you were Canadian, the asker would say, “yeah but what are you really” or something like that.
The only thing I know about my heritage is that I’m “a quarter Swedish.” (But not sure if my grandma’s parents were born Swedes or not…)
Guess I’d have to be American-American.
Beat me to it.
What hyphenation is Tiger Woods? African American? Native American? Asian American?
He’s an American American, as are all other Americans.
b&
Except for Republicans. Many of them are “Muricuns”.
Oof… “Muricun Americans”, I intended to type.
Actually, I think they tend to identify as Christian Americans, sadly enough.
b&
Jews are singularly targeted, on the one hand, and very miniscule in population numbers, on the other: 0.2% of world population and 2% of American population. That means, you shouldn’t be able to hear Jewish voices defending the USA, because they should be drowned out by the 98% of non-Jewish voices joining them. On the other hand, you should also see that the tiny percentage of Jews is up against many times its number, when it comes to dealing with antisemites, and that, too, makes Jewish voices hard to hear, especially above the well-oiled “BDS movement” propaganda machine and echo chamber.