Can we please, finally, once and for all, just accept the fact...

[Ken Burch]

Last edited Tue Mar 3, 2015, 05:52 AM - Edit history (1)

That opposition to antisemitism, which is a position every decent human being holds or should hold(as every human being should also oppose with equal passion and commitment all other forms of hatred) should have no connection whatsoever with the views anyone holds on the Israel/Palestine issue?

That being opposed to antisemitism doesn't require a person to "stand with Israel"?

Especially if "Stand(ing) with Israel" means unquestioningly supporting everything the Israeli government does to the Palestinians and also supporting Netanyahu's calls for the bombing of Iran?

Israel is just another country. It's government is made up of ordinary, fallible people, people whose interests are(as is the case with any other government on the planet)not necessarily congruent with the interests of the citizens of the country that government holds power in. And it's not at all clear that "Stand(ing) with Israel" is actually an effective way to fight antisemitism or defend Jewish people from persecution at all.

The fight against antisemitism is one issue.

The Israel/Palestine dispute should be considered entirely separate from that.

And the only way to defeat antisemitism, as well as all other forms of hate, is to work for a hate-free world.

[aquart]

1. Goodness, is big bad Israel bombing Iran?

When did they start?

[sabrina 1]

3. Bibi wants Obama to do it for him. Obama, thankfully, is working to resolve issues with Iran

peacefully.

So Bibi did an end run around the President, hatched a plot, used Boehner the moron, as a patsy by getting him to invite him to speak to a 'joint session of Congress' so HE, who apparently thinks he's also POTUS, can influence Congress to vote for more sanctions on Iran, when the president has expressly stated that that is not a good idea.

If Bibi wants to bomb Iran, he has a military, ours is busy elsewhere unfortunately.

[brush]

5. Well said

All dems should boycott the speech. Boner was played like a fiddle and thinks he's the one holding the bow.

He's only raised the spectre of Netanyahu appearing to have more influence on US foreign policy than our own president.

Other nations are certainly watching this disrespectful bit of insult/treachery/warmongering to see how it plays out.

[Segami]

21. Yes,...

our bombs are fully booked elsewhere....

[Ken Burch]

6. I didn't say Israel was bombing Iran. I said Netanyahu wants Iran bombed.

Netanyahu is not equivalent to "Israel" in its entirety, and nothing I said was an attack ON Israel as a country for anything.

We all know more sanctions can only lead in the end to bombing.

[Enthusiast]

27. Before I read one word of the responses I fully expected your words to be mischaracterized.

And so it goes.

[sabrina 1]

2. I think a vast majority of people already accept that. To treat Israel as if it were different, is a

form of bigotry imo. I view them the same way I view every legitimate nation. And I don't much care about the ridiculous people who try to distract from legitimate criticism of Israel's criminal treatment of the Palestinians by using 'anti-semitism' to try to put people on the defensive.

I think that grew old a long time ago. Let them try to defend the policies of Israel or don't waste anyone's time with that ridiculous charge.

Should we call anyone who criticizes US policies 'anti-American'? Only far right jerks do that.

[merrily]

4. Attempts to discredit people and their political stands by accusing them of

racism, sexism, anti-semitism, etc. runs rampant on this board. In my view, accusing every criticism of Obama of being racially-motivated is wrong; so ois accusing every criticism of Hillary of being motivated by sexism and so is accusing every criticism of Israel's government of being motivated by anti-semitism. What those people really seem to want is a pass because of someone's race, gender or ethnic Jewishness. I criticize Bubba Clinton as much as I criticize Hillary Clinton and I criticize Obama as much as I criticize them. In no instance does my criticism relate to gender, ethnicity or skin color. Yet, rather than debate the issue I did raise, the response if often that criticism is motivated by one form of bigotry or another. Fuck that.

That said, given the Holocaust and the many centuries of anti-Semitism, I do understand viewing as anti-Semitic claims that Israel should not exist at all, but should be returned to the Arabs instead. I never pondered it a really long time because I don't think anything like that will happen. But, just at first blush, I see the logic.

However, when it comes to differences of opinion over some action taken by the Israeli government, the actions of the government of Israel are as open to scrutiny and disagreement by people of good faith (no religious pun intended) as the actions of any other government, including our own--and we sure do criticize that a lot here.

[Behind the Aegis]

9. It works both ways.

There are more than few who falsely accuse others of "crying anti-Semitism" or "playing the anti-Semitism card" for disagreeing with someone's point of view. How is that any different? What is even more maddening is those who like to remind Jews what is and isn't anti-Semitism, as if we don't know. See, anytime a Jew speaks out in regards to Israel, if it isn't along the lines of the "acceptable" party line, then we are accusing others of anti-Semitism, making it about Jews by conflating, or some other bullshit.

[leftynyc]

11. Well put

Frankly, I'm getting sick to death of non-Jews telling me what is and what is not antisemitism and what should and should not concern me. I see it with those trying to decide what African Americans should feel strongly about, what gays feel strongly about. Let's face it, all of that just makes it easier for people to trash what they want to trash.

[merrily]

14. Please read my reply 12. If someone accuses me of sexism because I post an accurate fact about

Hillary after another poster "misspoke" in her favor, the call on me of sexism is bs and I am going to say so. That is not telling anyone what sexism is or isn't. It is simply calling bs on a very serious, yet totally bs, accusation about me and something specific that I posted.

Calling sexism or racism or anti-Semitism when a simple fact about a politician is stated is trashing whichever poster another DUer feels like trashing, not the poster who posted a fact "trashing" women or African Americans or Jews.

Am I saying criticism of a politician is never racism or sexism or anti-Semitism, or (fill in any bad motivation). No, of course not. Those things exist. However, it's not always racism or sexism or anti-Semitism, either.

As Behind the Aegis correctly stated, it goes both ways.

[Ken Burch]

32. Defending Israeli security policies and Netanyahu's rhetoric about Iran

does nothing at all to fight antisemitism. Why can you not see that?

Netanyahu, by the way he's acting, doesn't even want antisemitism to be effectively combatted. Nor does he want peace. The Israeli right wing would totally collapse if peace with the Arabs were ever actually achieved-they exist only because the war goes on and on and on.

And it's legitimate to point out that fighting antisemitism by trying to silence debate about the Occupation and the settlements totally doesn't work.

[leftynyc]

38. Antisemitism just is

and antisemites will use whatever reason - real or only in their heads - to be antisemites. Bibi has nothing to do with it and he's just a convenient excuse. Those that use one leader's actions to tag all Jews (not just Israelis but ALL Jews) are nothing but revolting bigots. I suspect Bibi knows this as well and while I disagree with him, I don't believe he's doing it for any reason other than he truly believes that Iran is a threat to Israel. I think they are also but I'm willing to give diplomacy a chance while at the same time realizing that's very easy for Americans to say - we're not in the line of fire in a country that is 9 miles wide. This is something for Israelis to decide.

[merrily]

12. As I mentioned once before, I am not familiar with that as much because I tend to

stay away from the IP group. What I am very familiar with is what I described, namely, being called racist for criticizing something Obama did and being called sexist for even less.

Example: a poster once claimed to another poster that Hillary corrected her 2008 airport story immediately. Factually, that is false--and I had a strong feeling the poster knew that perfectly well.

Whether he knew or not, I posted that she did not correct it until videos of children giving her flowers appeared all over national TV. For that, I was called sexist. Mind you, all I did was factually correct either a lie or a mistake on the part of the poster who then immediately accused me of sexism.

Additionally, he "informed" me that I could be sure that anyone who would even bring up the airport business (I hadn't brought it up) was sexist.

However, while I am unfamiliar with doings at IP, I think the remedy is the same in all cases. If someone is hurling a bs personal accusation at you, be it racism, sexism, playing the anti-Semitism card or anything else, just point out that the accusation is bs. That is what I do, anyway. Once, I called out a poster on his bs accusations about me. He alerted on my post for the word "bullshit."

Someone posted the results of the alert. The jury voted in my favor. It may even have been unanimous, but I can't swear to that One very smart juror even noted that the poster was trying to get me locked out of a thread I had started myself, which had not even occurred to me. Another noted that he had started the fight, so no hide, etc. Despite that kind and wise jury, I recommend using "bs" instead of "bullshit." Means the same thing, yet somehow comes across less harsh.

Also, I said that people of good faith can criticize the Israeli government, just as they criticize any other government. The flip side is that people of good faith can also defend the Israeli government, just as they defend any other government they believe is doing the right thing. Good faith in this context meaning, neither an anti-Semite nor someone playing the anti-Semitism card, but someone simply having an opinion.

[Behind the Aegis]

15. As I said, it works both ways.

I certainly can relate to some of what you said. Criticize Palestine or its government...ISLAMOPHOBE! OR, the "best," the passive aggressive, "why do you hate Arabs/Muslims?" Like you, I also don't tolerate it. However, I do suggest you take a look around, no need to go to I/P and see how many are willing to write "well, if that makes me an anti-Semite, so be it." "Oh, so-and-so disagreed with Israel, they must be an anti-Semite! " Anti-Semitism is a joke to more than a few persons and others, really don't give two craps. For all those who claim "Israel and Jews are two separate things" which I do agree, why is it so damn important to keep a list of which Jews are boycotting/avoiding/ignoring Netanyahu's speech? Why are they being applauded? Also, why is it so important to tell Jews what is and isn't anti-Semitism and to declare how so many people are opposed to it?

[merrily]

22. I agree. It does go both ways. I have seen such posts here and there, but I am sure

those who read in IP see many more of them and can better discern patterns, standard talking points, etc.

And, no anti-Semitism is not a joke. However, having had it implied or stated that I am racist, sexist, a Teabagger, etc. because I don't like what Third Way politics has done to the country and the Democratic Party, I can understand why people begin to react inappropriately after being accused of being something very ugly X number of times, simply for having a particular political POV.

I don't think I've made jokes about that on my own behalf. I usually post, "No, every criticism of Obama is not racially motivated," or "bs" or something to that effect. However, I do remember one post of mine, approximating a quote from the Karate Kid after a poster I admire got accused of racism yet again because of criticizing Obama's actions. ("If do right, no can defense.&quot I guess that could have been construed as a joke, but I really was trying to make a serious point.

Anyway, it's way too easy to falsely accuse a poster of ugly, unacceptable motivations and then claim any denial is protesting too much or some such. And then have six other third Wayers or Obama fans or Hillary fans chime in. And that is way too easy, whether the false accusation is of being some ugly "ism" or other, or of using some ugly card or other. I try to avoid both. I understand both frustrations. However, since I've never been accused of using any kind of card, I am more familiar with being on the receiving end of the "ism" accusations. But both happen and both are wrong, I agree.

[leftynyc]

37. I was accused of

carrying bibi's water for merely pointing out that neither he nor any other Israeli put that revolting ad about Susan Rice in the NY Times. It was an American rabbi. Just pointing out FACTS gets people's undies in a bunch on some issues. Also pointing out that very strong majorities of Americans support Israel and in the latest poll showed only 16% have sympathies with the Palestinians get me pilloried. I learned long ago that DU doesn't represent Americans, doesn't even represent most Democrats. I also learned long ago that if someone isn't Jewish (or African American, or gay), their opinion on what constitutes antisemtism (or racism or bigotry) is irrelevant.

[merrily]

43. That takes me back to the fact that that kind of accusation is rampant on this board.

I also learned long ago that if someone isn't Jewish (or African American, or gay), their opinion on what constitutes antisemtism (or racism or bigotry) is irrelevant.

Not when saying Hillary didn't correct her story right away and on her own initiative gets me an accusation of sexism. Then again, inasmuch as I am female, I guess that, under your standard, I am allowed to say what sexism toward women does and does not consist of, while my male accuser did not have that right?

Sorry, but I think people accused of some ugly ism simply because they have a different political position do get to defend themselves against the accusation. So does a man wrongly accused of sexism toward women. If you believe that people don't have a right to defend themselves against ugly accusations, we simply disagree on that point.

[Enthusiast]

28. Well said, merrily.

[merrily]

29. Thank you.

[Duppers]

57. + many. nt

[Warpy]

7. We still need to acknowledge how important Israel is to a lot of Jewish folks

because they've seen sane countries go crazy with antisemitism. Israel is the one place they can run to that will accept them, no matter how crazy a government or a population gets. Yes, the country is far too small to hold all of them, it's the idea that there is one place on earth where Jews will always be welcomed that is so vitally important.

I hate many of the things the government there has been doing for too many decades. However, I'm all too aware of how important its continued existence is.

[leftynyc]

8. Far, far too many people

will not acknowledge the truth of your post. You have my sincere gratitude for "getting it".

[COLGATE4]

40. Me too.

[Ken Burch]

13. It's entirely possible to do that

without giving the government there the kind of unquestioning support(even on matters where it is being immoral, such as the continued settlement expansion in the West Bank and the insistence on collectively punishing and immiserating ALL Palestinians for the actions of a violent few)that is usually what is demanded.

Israel could securely be a haven for Jews worldwide without having an inch of the West Bank under military occupation, or without having a single settlement(all of which are illegal)there. And could still securely play that role without Iran being bombed (which would inevitably lead to war, as there is no way to bomb Iran without there being a full military response from Iran and its ally Russia).

[nomorenomore08]

16. Very true. You make an important point there.

As much as I dislike the current government's policies toward Palestine, I would never argue against Israel's continued existence as a nation.

[merrily]

31. That is basically what the second paragraph of my Reply 4 was acknowledging, namely, the need for a

safe haven.

[Behind the Aegis]

10. No.

Just because criticism of Israel isn't always anti-Semitism, it doesn't mean it doesn't happen. This is not a "the light is on or off" situation. Do you think that criticism of Obama is never racially motivated? If not, then why would this situation be any different?

[nomorenomore08]

17. I think the telltale sign (or one of them) is nebulously blaming "Jews" for current Israeli policy.

When even average Israelis, let alone Jews who live outside Israel, have virtually no control over what someone like Netanyahu does. The Jewish people, as a whole, are no one's enemy and should never be considered such.

[Behind the Aegis]

18. That is one sign.

Another is telling Jews what we should and should include as "anti-Semitic." This also applies to those who blame anti-Semitism on Israel or its leaders, or "excusing/denying" anti-Semitism "because of Israel."

[nomorenomore08]

20. Yep. Anti-Semitism exists, and has always existed, independent of any action taken by Israel itself.

Centuries-old, deep-seated hatreds don't just disappear (or change form) spontaneously.

[Ken Burch]

35. Nobody anywhere is saying that antisemitism doesn't exist, and that it didn't predate Israel.

Or especially that antisemitism was somehow created BY Israel's creation.

All of those assertions are strawmen.

Antisemitism is ancient, as are most other prejudices.

The point is that a person's views on Israeli security policy or even on Zionism should not be considered a marker of whether or not a person is an antisemite. It's just not that simple.

There are philosemites and committed opponents of antisemitism who support everything the Israeli government does in the name of security; equally, there are philosemites and committed opponents of antisemitism who are critical of those policies(and even, in many cases, nonzionists who are philosemites and committed opponents of antisemitism)

At the same time, there are some antisemites who want Israel to cease to exist, and some antisemites who support Israel's existence because they want their own countries to be Jew-free(a lot of Republican congressmen would probably fit into that category, IMHO).

[nomorenomore08]

41. I agree, but with qualifications (as noted above).

I was responding to BtA - I don't disagree at all with your basic points here.

[Ken Burch]

36. Wrong.

It's legitimate to point out that it's unfair to make sweeping equations of criticism of Israeli security policy with antizionism or antisemitism. It's legitimate to point out that some Israel leaders have not been particularly interested in fighting antisemitism in the Diaspora.

Antisemites are people who hate Jews and wish to do them harm-not people who simply disagree with Israeli security policies.

Opposing the West Bank Occupation, or the settlements, or demands that Iran be bombed, is not antisemitism.

[treestar]

47. Some people have absurd standards for it

One doesn't have to be Jewish to decide what is and isn't anti-semitism.

And not all Jewish people agree on it.

There are a few who will say it's anti-Semitic whenever someone non-Jewish gets in their way - we don't have to accept that. Every victimized group has that few who are absurd about it.

[Behind the Aegis]

51. Some sure do.

Including those who don't find anything, except the most egregious examples, anti-Semitic. And while it is true that every group has those who are "absurd" about it, they are the exception, not the rule.

[Ken Burch]

33. Agreed, obviously. n/t.

[Ken Burch]

19. I didn't say that NO criticism of Israel was ever anti-semitic.

What I said was that people shouldn't be expected to "Stand with Israel" in the sense I described in the OP(the Likudnik sense that equates ANY criticism of the actions of the Israeli government with "hatred of Israel" or support of antisemitism).

The tendency has been to use accusations of being "anti-Israel" or "antisemitic" to silence virtually all critical discussion of things like the Occupation, the illegal and totally unjustifiable West Bank settlements, and the insistence on collectively punishing ALL Palestinians for the actions of those among them who use violence.

All forms of prejudice and hatred need to be fought. But trying to silence discussion about what the Israeli government does to Palestinians or about Netanyahu's demands that Iran be bombed by throwing around broad-brush accusations of antisemitism doesn't do anything to actually combat antisemitism.

If you want to fight antisemitism, the way to do it is to fight all forms of bigotry-NOT to make people give unquestioning support to a particular state arising from a particular nationalist movement just to prove that they aren't themselves antisemites.

Yes, there are antisemites who criticize Israel. But there were also antisemites who played major roles in creating Israel-like Arthur Balfour, who issued the Declaration calling for a Jewish homeland in the Middle East in large part because he wanted as many Jews as possible to leave Britain, and Harry Truman, who backed the creation of the state in 1948 at least in part because he didn't want to do the decent humane thing and admit the Jewish refugees from Europe to the U.S.

It's not necessarily as simple as "person who supports Israeli government hawkishness=person who actually opposes antisemitism". Or even that those who are nonzionist or postzionist are supporters of antisemitism(personally, I think such people are unrealistic, but that's not the same as being bigots).

What is needed is open debate and new ideas-any situation is improved when those two things are acceptable.

[Behind the Aegis]

24. Why do you continue to tell me (and others) how we should fight anti-Semitism?

Do you not think we know how? NOT a SINGLE person has said anything like your remark:

"If you want to fight antisemitism, the way to do it is to fight all forms of bigotry-NOT to make people give unquestioning support to a particular state arising from a particular nationalist movement just to prove that they aren't themselves antisemites. "

Only YOU made that claim!

"It's not necessarily as simple as "person who supports Israeli government hawkishness=person who actually opposes antisemitism". "

Again, that is YOUR claim!

I could easily reword your OP in regards to racism and it would be roundly condemned. BTW, why did you anwser my questions?

"Do you think that criticism of Obama is never racially motivated? If not, then why would this situation be any different?"

Would you presume to write the following:

Can we please, finally, once and for all, just accept the fact that opposition to (racism), which is a position every decent human being holds or should hold(as every human being should also oppose with equal passion and commitment all other forms of hatred) should have no connection whatsoever with the views anyone holds on (decisions made by Obama)?

That being opposed to (racism) doesn't require a person to "stand with (Obama)"?

Especially if "Stand(ing) with (Obama)" means unquestioningly supporting everything the (his) government does to the (pick a group/region) and also supporting (Obama's) calls for the (troops on the ground in Syria)?

Would you seriously dictate to AA people here what is and isn't racist in regards to criticism of Obama?

[Ken Burch]

30. Actually, a lot of AA people would agree with that passage as you phrased it.

A lot of African Americans are perfectly comfortable with criticizing the Obama Administration on those issues. You should read the kind of things Cornel West says on the subject.

Almost no one in the African American community, or in the anti-racism community, equate any and all criticism of Obama policies with a call to either impeach Obama or to repeal Jim Crow-or, for that matter, to make the United States helpless against attack.

From what I've seen, almost no one at all in the AA community equates any and all disagreements with Obama with racism-and especially not if those disagreements from the pro-peace and justice left.

Clearly, criticism of Obama on foreign policy from the left and from people of good will is not seen as racism by most African Americans, many of whom make such criticisms themselves.

Just as clearly, criticism of the settlement policy, the occupation, and the Likudnik demands that Iran be bombed does not equate to antisemitism. There are antisemites who make such criticisms, but that does not mean that the vast majority of such critiques are driven by antisemitism. Israel is not "the Jews"...it is simply a state that calls itself Jewish. It has the right to exist in peace, but it does not equate to every Jewish person on the planet or speak for all Jewish people. A state is simply a state, and no government needs or deserves any more deference than any other

At the same time, the insistence has been made that the ONLY way a person can prove that she or he is not either an "antisemite" or, if that person happens to be Jewish "a self-hating Jew", is to unquestioningly back everything the Israeli government says it has to do to Palestinians in the name of what it calls "security". This demand does nothing to fight antisemitism and does nothing to protect the victims of antisemitism.

And the reason I have raised the issue of how to fight antisemitism(which you think I have no right to do, for some reason) is that the idea of fighting it by making a show of backing Netanyahu and the occupation and the settlements simply doesn't work. The Israeli government itself isn't really doing anything to fight antisemitism-and if you look at the rhetoric Netanyahu is using, it doesn't look as if he even wants to fight it-it sometimes appears that he wants antisemitism to get worse.

I want antisemitism to end. You know that perfectly well. But it can't be ended, or even fought, by silencing open discussion on the issues I've mentioned above. Nor can it be ended by equating legitimate criticism of a government's policies with malevolent intent. Where such intent exists, it needs to be called out. But it's wrong to assume that most of such criticism or debate is driven by that intent.

What I've said was always about the need to achieve reconciliation, which must come if peace is to be possible, and the need to use the most effective means to fight hatred. It's always legitimate to discuss that, whether or not you are a member of the group that has been subject to that hatred, because only with open discussion can real ideas for ending hatred and injustice ever emerge.

Is any of that such a terrible thing to say?

If so, why?

[JustAnotherGen]

46. He Quoted Cornel West

I'm an African American and I think there are very few AA's at DU and that I know in real life that give Corny any weight anymore.

Don't waste your time on this.

[ismnotwasm]

52. +1000

[nomorenomore08]

25. "All forms of prejudice and hatred need to be fought." THIS.

Condoning anti-Arab bigotry - as many of Israel's staunchest supporters unfortunately do - only helps other forms of bigotry and hatred flourish.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

49. Conservative media is equating the President's views on Bibi/Israel with anti-semitism

FAUX hosts have done this, as have local conservative radio outlets in my area.

I find the charge despicable. YMMV.

[Behind the Aegis]

50. That is JUST AS WRONG as claiming anti-Semitism never plays a part.

Their false accusations are as scurrilous as those who falsely claim anyone who holds an divergent opinion on Israel is "playing the anti-Semitism" card. YMMV.

[nomorenomore08]

23. In general I agree with this, but unfortunately there are those on both sides who indulge in rank

bigotry. Ironically, many of the same people who blanketly accuse critics of "hating Jews" or "hating Israel" seem to have no problem with dehumanizing the Palestinians - calling them animals, savages, implying that civilians (even children) are fair game. Not that dehumanization of Jews - reducing them to 'Elders of Zion'-esque caricatures - isn't going on as well.

[leftynyc]

39. Really?

And who are these people who accuse critics of hating Jews while dehumanizing Palestinians? DUers?

[nomorenomore08]

42. Probably not. Most of them are decidedly on the political right. n/t

[Enthusiast]

26. Kicked and recommended a whole bunch!

Well said!

[daleanime]

34. K&R....

[treestar]

45. I doubt it

The Israeli right wing is always going to throw that consideration into the debate. It could be real in some cases. There are actual anti-Semites.

[Algernon Moncrieff]

48. You and I have disagreed on several issues, but we agree 100% here.

Israel is a nation-state. Judaism is a faith. Disagreement with Israel has no bearing on one's views of persons practicing the Jewish faith.

[Ken Burch]

55. Thank you for that post. n/t.

[elleng]

53. Yes.

[guillaumeb]

54. I am not sure what the many posters here who criticized your statement read:

but it was not your actual post.
Too many people read only those words that they wish to read to confirm that the writer is a "whatever".
When you wrote that:
That opposition to anti-Semitism, which is a position every decent human being holds or should hold(as every human being should also oppose with equal passion and commitment all other forms of hatred) should have no connection whatsoever with the views anyone holds on the Israel/Palestine issue?

I feel you gave a concise and clear position.

Far too many here and elsewhere conflate any criticism with the Israeli government with anti-Semitism. Whether they do this from a belief that the statement is true or a desire to use ad hominem statements as a substitute for real debate is irrelevant.

Fantastic summary Ken Burch