Important Announcement

See here for an important message regarding the community which has become a read-only site as of October 31.

 
Page 6 of 31  •  Prev 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 ... 31 Next
Switch to Forum Live View
Locked: Judea Pearl: Anti-Zionism is Racism
6 years ago  ::  Feb 22, 2012 - 5:29PM #51
SherriMunnerlyn
Posts: 7,521

Feb 22, 2012 -- 4:18PM, rocketjsquirell wrote:


Sherri


Making up stuff is also a wonderful way of diverting attention from the subject. I see you are trying desperately to do so.


Would you like to address the subject matter of this thread? I have given you a working definition. Do you see any thing in the definition which would apply to anything you may have written or anything you may believe? Have you asked yourself, why did I write that and/or why do I believe that?




rocket,


Since your so-called working definition of AntiSemitism inappropriately brings Israel into this, it must be rejected. AntiSemitism is about hate in the essence of racism and prejudice towards Jewish people, not criticism of unlawful practices of the present day nation of Israel.


Here are some parts of your definition that are defective, as they address Israel and not acts against Jews on the basis of racism or prejudice :


"In addition, such manifestations could also target the state of Israel, conceived as a Jewish collectivity. Antisemitism frequently charges Jews with conspiring to harm humanity, and it is often used to blame Jews for “why things go wrong.” It is expressed in speech, writing, visual forms and action, and employs sinister stereotypes and negative character traits. "


 "Accusing the Jews as a people, or Israel as a state, of inventing or exaggerating the Holocaust."


"Accusing Jewish citizens of being more loyal to Israel, or to the alleged priorities of Jews worldwide, than to the interests of their own nations."


"Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor."



 "Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation."


" Using the symbols and images associated with classic antisemitism (e.g., claims of Jews killing Jesus or blood libel) to characterize Israel or Israelis. :


"Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis."


"Holding Jews collectively responsible for actions of the state of Israel." 
 


As the article I quoted addressed, all claims that anti-Semitism is an attack on Israeli nationalism rather than an attack on human dignity, must continue to be challenged.


Sherri

Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Feb 22, 2012 - 5:35PM #52
rocketjsquirell
Posts: 19,045

Sherri


In what way is the definition defective?


Do you consider inventing slanders about Jews to be philo-semitic?


I do note that each of the parts of the definition to which you object are classic anti-semitism.


Please bear in mind that the definition is the definition of anti-semitism as used in this thread. You are free to disagree with the definition and/or explain how your statements and actions do or do not fit within that definition. You are also free to explain why I or anyone else should not consider any statement made by you or referenced by you to be or not to be anti-semitic. 


Thank you in advance for staying focused on the topic.

Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Feb 22, 2012 - 6:34PM #53
LeahOne
Posts: 18,418

When a person claims that 'the Zionists control the US media' - that is a classic anti-semitic (Jew-hating) canard.   When I hear that sort of remark enough times, I know it's an integral part of that person's world-view.  IOW, that their world-view is anti-Jewish.


The same thing with people who insist the Jewish faith is 'exclusive':  that of course makes no sense, as Judaism has always accepted converts (the 'mixed multitude' at Sinai being a case in point).  It also makes no sense because Judaism actually affirms that YHVH loves all people and that 'the righteous of all people will have a share in the world to come.


If it's difficult to define something , sometimes it helps to give examples.....

Moderated by CharikIeia on Feb 22, 2012 - 06:58PM
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Feb 22, 2012 - 6:49PM #54
SherriMunnerlyn
Posts: 7,521

Feb 22, 2012 -- 6:00PM, rocketjsquirell wrote:


Sheri


Please apply your statement to the definition and discuss in light of those defitions as requested. I am not playing your change the subject game.




rocket,



Your definition of AntiSemitism is defective, until you come up with a legitimate definition of antiSemitism I have nothing to discuss with you.


Criticizing war crimes of nations is not AntiSemitism.


Sherri

Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Feb 22, 2012 - 7:00PM #55
rangerken
Posts: 16,967

Sherri wrote "Criticizing war crimes of nations is not AntiSemitism". She is right. It isn't. More to the point, criticizing Israel for what someone thinks are war crimes is, simply, criticizing Israel. Now it is certainly open to argument about whether or not Israel is gulity of war crimes. But someone offering such an opinion is NOT defacto anti-semetic...just anti-Israel.


Rangerken, co-host

Libertarian, Conservative, Life member of the NRA and VFW
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Feb 22, 2012 - 7:06PM #56
CharikIeia
Posts: 8,301

Being anti Israel is something quite different from being critical of Israel.
It is only on the most superficial level that these two can be equated.


I think anti-semitism can best be defined as everything that hinders self-determination of Jews in particular. In that sense, I agree with the opening post's gist - but I also think many of the current Israeli government's policies are long term anti-semitic, as they put the viability of the Jewish State at risk. These guys need some thorough criticism!

tl;dr
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Feb 22, 2012 - 7:14PM #57
rocketjsquirell
Posts: 19,045

Chari


See we do agree on things. Criticism of a policy of the current, past or future Israeli government is not anti-Israel. Criticism of Israel as a country, an idea, etc... is,  

Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Feb 22, 2012 - 7:47PM #58
SherriMunnerlyn
Posts: 7,521

Criticism of bad acts of my own country or of bad acts of my country's ally, Israel, or of bad acts of my country's enemy, Iran, does not mean I hate any of these countries or their people, or desire any of these country's destructions or the people's destruction, either. I am not AntiUS or AntiIsrael or AntiIran or AntiZionist, either. There is an organization with AntiZionist in its title, and everytime I hear their name, I cringe, for an entity to take their entire identity being AntiSomebody is repellant to me.  


I believe we all, all nations and all individuals everywhere, (noone excepted) can change course when we go down the wrong path. We can change our actions and ideas and policies, we can all choose to respect the human rights of others, and governments can choose to treat their people and other nations the right way, that is true of every person in the United States, every person in Israel and the OPT, and every person in Iran. I believe there is hope for all of us, no matter what we did yesterday, or even today, tomorrow is a new opportiunity to get it right, to do what is right. And we need to give each other opportunities to do just that, to talk to each other, to not get too tied up in labels like terrorist, for example.


I am reminded of words spoken last year by an Iranian activist, Mehdi Khazali, now imprisoned, and on a 40+ day hunger strike, he was put in prison for 14 years for participating in an interview with the BBC and speaking about human rights abuses in Iran and writing a letter to Khameini. He said, he still wanted, more than anything, for  his government to survive, but reforms must be made.  I feel much the same way he feels about the future of all of the three governments I mentioned earlier in this post. The best thing, by far, for all of us, is for our governments to voluntarily institute reforms that result in all of our nations honoring the requirements of intl law and respecting the rights of all of the people in our lands.


Maybe, my ideas seem impractical and stupid and nieve. But I see myself as the eternal optimist, and in light of the One who I follow, and who He lived and died for, all of us, there is no reason to change them. Tortured For Christ was written by a man who, as he was tortured by prison guards, he prayed for them, he felt love for them as they tortured him. That is the attitude to seek to have, the ideal and ultimate attitude to have. I am certainly not claiming I have that attitude.


Sherri 

Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Feb 22, 2012 - 11:10PM #59
habesor
Posts: 6,223

Miraj,


I asked a question about what would happen after a one state solution was adopted in the case of a Jewish community in danger. I gave as an example, the actual situation of the evacuation  of the Ethiopian community to Israel. Your response was a long time in coming and was the following:


"Israel as an "insurance policy" for Jews in other countries and a preservation society for Jewish culture has proved to be too high a price to pay.  Israel has a military supported by a world superpower, yet it still keeps its jackboot on the neck of refugees it created while spewing crocidile tears day in and day out that its the real victim.  The greatest saving grace that Israel has is Israelis like me who are willing to challenge the status quo and to seek justice against what may seem to be  a losing proposition." 


Miraj, I asked a question dealing with how the one-state solution would deal with a specific problem. The closest you came to answering my question was to talk about the expense of Israel as an insurance policy for Jews in other countries. I interpret this as meaning that in a one-state solution the Ethiopian Jews would have never been saved from their precarious situation because in a one-state solution such an action would be deemed to be too expensive. I also interpret your answer to be that in a one-state solution all such rescues  would be deemed to be too expensive. The rest of your answer doesn't address the question I asked. 


Now perhaps I got the meaning of your answer wrong. If so, then please reply to my original question more clearly. As I noted above, your position on the one-state solution seems to lack intellectual honesty, and your waffling in your answer to the legitimate question I asked is, in my opinion, an example of this. 


I will reply to your other comments in a separate message.


Habesor


PS -  IDF soldiers are not issued jackboots and if there has been repression of Palestinian refugees over the years, it has been carried out by the Lebanese, Jordanians, Egyptians, Kuwaitis, the PLO, Hamas and other Arab brothers of the Palestinians and not by Israel or the IDF. That was a good try to change the subject by presenting such a falsehood and doing so in particularly distasteful fashion but I would once again suggest that it is not an answer to the question I asked.   

Habesor
Quick Reply
Cancel
6 years ago  ::  Feb 22, 2012 - 11:42PM #60
habesor
Posts: 6,223

Miraj, I wrote:


"Having read the rest of this thread now, I would like to say, Miraj, that in regard to your position on the one-State solution, it seems to me that you are being intellectually dishonest with the rest of us and/or perhaps with yourself as well."


No surprise.  That the patent response I get for rejecting with Israeli nationalism. 


Actually, since you have on this forum, refered to yourself as an Israeli, you don't reject Israeli nationalism. What you reject is Jewish nationalism. You went on to reply about my suggestion that German reunification is not an example of a one-state solution:


"We would disagree that East and West Germany were the same nation at the time they were unified.  However, I see Palestinians as part of Palestine, as is Israel.  Israel isn't going to be able to push all those folks into the sea, they're no enthusiastic about two states, so reunification of Palestine is the deal they will need to prepare for."


Again, more intellectual dishonesty. It does not matter what you think. Whether or not a one-state solution will work (as it has not worked in a large number of cases around the world) depends on what the Israelis and Palestinians think and how we Israelis and the Palestinians choose to define ourselves.The Germans, even when divided into two states, defined themselves as one nation. All of the other examples of failed one-state solutions define themselves as two or more nations. 


I asked why the Palestinians of Gaza, the West Bank and Jordan cannot seem to unite themselves into one-state, to which you replied:


"If you appreciate that logic, why not ask why don't imported Jewish Israelis go back to where they came from?  Their history and geneology is more firmly established in other lands. They are different from the indigenous people of the region.  If that's what you're basing your reasoning on, then you must agree that resettlement would be best for the foreign elements in Palestine."


This is an intriguing answer, Miraj, especially for someone advocating a one-state solution. First you argue that for you the Jews and Arabs are all Palestinians and now you are arguing that the Jews are a foreign element in Palestine and should go back to where they came from. (Speaking about jackboots, where have we heard this trope about Jews as aliens before?) Certainly ones intellectual honesty must be questioned if on the one hand they are arguing that two peoples/nations are so alike that peace will come if they form one state, while at the same time one argues that one of those peoples/nations are alien and belong on another continent.


Miraj, do you see the self contradiction in your own remarks?


Habesor





Habesor
Quick Reply
Cancel
Page 6 of 31  •  Prev 1 ... 4 5 6 7 8 ... 31 Next
 
    Viewing this thread :: 0 registered and 1 guest
    No registered users viewing
    Advertisement

    Beliefnet On Facebook