But that version of antisemitism isn’t unique to the left,
and
It’s been an issue between the neocons and the paleocons since the beginning.
CMC fnord!
Since you don’t know any, they don’t exist. Your post is my cite. Case closed.
Sorry to play the victim card out of turn.
First, being critical of Israel doesn’t make you an anti-semite.
Complaining about how you’re always being called an anti-semite is another story. Yes, it’s too strong to say that complaining about being called an anti-semite makes you an anti-semite. But complaining about it all the time?
There are certain people who complain all the time about how they’re called racists. These people are a lot more likely to actually be racists than people who never complain about being called a racist.
If you say so. I’ve heard plenty of people say this happens a lot, but I’ve seen the complaint made more often than I have seen the actual stifling.
I most definitely am not. I said there are some antisemites on the left, which there are. There are some on the right, too. They tend to have different outlooks and this thread was about ones on the left. crowmanyclouds’ point about Pat Buchanan and paleoconservatives is well taken, however.
I didn’t say they can’t exist. You’re making up shit I didn’t say. I understand that’s easier than actually addressing what I did say, but it’s not a very effective tactic.
It is incumbent on those who want to assert that there is any significant antisemitism on the left to back it up with something. I am asking where it is. I’m on the left, and am very familiar with the left and I don’t see it. I would be surprised to see it. If you’re so positive it’s there, point it out.
To the extent that I see any left wing antisemitism, it seems to manifest itself as an ability to turn a blind eye to the wrongful deeds of the Palestinians because of their status as victims in the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. This blind spot results in an uneven criticism of one side over the other. Whether or not that actually qualifies as antisemitism is questionable.
Antisemitism is when you try to change history, dilute the facts, and hold Israel up to standards that no other nation is capable (or expected) of.
Jews in Israel criticize the government as much as Americans criticize their government.
Some people use Israel as a launching pad for their antiSemtisim (like Ahmadinejad, for example). Some people who criticize Israel put forth antiSemetic views without even realizing it, either because they are ignorant of the facts or because they are ignorant of what they are doing. In the end, it makes no difference the meaning behind your intent because it’s just as damaging.
Statements like, “The Jews came over to Palestine and took all the land away from the Palestinians who had been there for thousands of years” is antiSemetic because it’s a) not true, but b) it demonizes Jews using the same rhetoric that has been used against them for years, while c) uplifting an idealism that wants to extinguish a state that was built on the backs of Holocaust survivors who were trying to ensure it never happened again.
Equating Israel to apartheid South Africa is dangerous because it suggests that Israelis (i.e., the Jewish ones) have the same set of beliefs, intentions, or agenda as, say, the Botha government. That is wrong on so many levels, but the “Jews are racist and only care for their own” shit has been going on for a long, long time.
Shit. It’s like, first we killed Jesus, and now that no one cares anymore, we’re guilty of slaughtering innocent Palestinian children for kicks. :dubious:
The newer generation didn’t live through World War II, Arab nationalism in the 60s and 70s, or the concept of cold war. When they look at Israel, they are less likely to see context.
Finally, left-wing groups are notorious for taking one group’s campaign for liberties and likening it to their own, e.g., Israel & South Africa or, in the case of the U.S.: any libertarian movement (gay, female, Hispanic, disabilities) and calling upon black civil rights memories of the past.
What’s the problem here? With the understanding that no situation is ever just like another, what’s wrong with seeing commonalities between various struggles for liberty? Isn’t it natural to sympathize with someone in a similar circumstance?
In the US you will find more anti-Israel sentiment among the left but that isn’t the same as anti-semitism. I don’t see any of those leftists criticize jews as individuals, or criticize the ones who live in the US or Europe. They seem more upset about behaviors of the state of Israel.
That’s the current thinking, yes.
Israel is a Jewish state that was founded on the idea of religions freedom. (It still is.)
Palestinianism (yes, I just -ismed that!) is an Arab-only ideology.
People also conflate the status of Arab Israelis with that of Palestinians.
Israel doesn’t want a one-state solution. That is not a solution. It doesn’t want to be responsible for the territories at all. But Israelis would also like to stay in existence…the Arab world has had decades to help the logistics of a Palestinian state. Instead they have rejected them (like Jordan) or use them as a way to promote hostility towards Israel (like Syria).
It isn’t in Iran, Iraq, Syria, Saudi Arabia, or Lebanon’s best interests for a viable Palestinian state to exist, because then those governments would have a harder time blaming the Israeli and American governments for their problems. (:
First, any struggle for liberty should be based on the merits of the struggle, not capitalizing on another group’s victory or legend.
For example, it’s one thing to cite MLK when talking about gay rights in the U.S. in regards to liberty. It is another to say that MLK would be doing this action right now, or that this struggle is the same as the Civil Rights one. It isn’t.
Racism and homophobia may usually come from the same kind of people, but they are completely different things.
The East Coast Chicano movements in the 1970s and 1990s is an example of a one group’s struggle that is similar.
It’s funny, for centuries the whole world either turned a blind eye to the persecution of Jews or participated in it outright - as well as the persecution of every other ethnic group and nation under the sun - but for some odd reason, as soon as the Jews get a state of their own, all of a sudden everyone is a giant humanitarian who is extremely concerned with the well-being of Palestinians.
I think it’s a double standard. I’m not sure if I can call it anti-Semitism or not, but I think it’s a fucked up way of thinking.
“For the whole history of the world, we’ve been butchering and conquering and enslaving everyone who’s not like us…and you Jews just came late to the party.”
It does not because it’s not racially motivated. The tendency is to want to take the side of the oppressed and the underdogs.
How about just not taking my tax money to subsidize apartheid and racial entitlement. I’d settle for that.
Lefties are not antisemetic. They just think the Israelis are doing bad by the Palestinians. They are anti bad politics. They are anti repression. If Israel and Palestine had an agreement, lefties would love the Israelies.
The fallacy in this is that it’s not the same “everybody.” Most people who are critical of Israel were born decades after the holocaust, and their problems with Israel have zero - ZERO - to do with race. If you think anyone on the left is simply upset that the “Jews have their own state” then you live in a reality all your own.
It was two leftist Presidents who stopped the Holocaust, by the way, and who gave Israel to the Jews (via the UN) in the first place.
A local community radio station plays a lot of Pacifica Radio programming, one of them a show called “Democracy Now”. Strangely, even though Israel is the only democracy in that part of the world, the show never has a kind thing to say about the country, instead focusing much of its coverage to injustices against the Palestinians. Meanwhile, there’s no coverage of the vice versa; terrorist attacks and other wrongful actions of the Palestinians against Israel and Israelis.
In an earlier thread on this topic, I attributed the left’s antipathy of Israel on its tendency to defend the underdog in a conflict. One example: Democracy Now, there was a lot of sympathy towards the rebels in the conflict in Libya. That was. until NATO got involved and backed the rebels. Now, the perspective seems to be one of Western forces “meddling” in a region where they don’t belong.
One more thing: The Palestinians have forms of government/s that are not Israeli. Hamas was elected in Gaza and makes itself a proponent of eradicating Israel. Israel recognizes the PLO as a legitimate representative of the Palestinian people, even if they (like the US) consider it to be a terrorist organization.
While the PLO was founded on similar ideals as Hamas, it has softened. It hasn’t changed its charter and still leaps on the chance to criticize Israel’s actions in Gaza, BUT it is an organization with leadership that is workable. Unfortunately, that leadership has less policing power than it did 10, 15, 20 years ago.
The PLO has focused more on territories and statehood in recent years. Arafat was a sleazeball who, while understooding the value of diplomatic relations, seemingly enjoyed the Palestinian cause as a way to prop up his own feet. :rolleyes:
Abbas has the job of pandering to both extremism (and fighting Hamas influence) and (I am inclined to believe) actually being diplomatic while actually trying to move towards a two-state solution. His objection to the withdraw in Gaza was, ironically, because Israel did it without consultation. (Get that? Israel *withdrew
- and removed its own citizens and people got mad.)
Unfortunately, a peaceful two state solution may have died with Arafat.
To criticize Israeli government (all of it - Likud-types and Dove alike) this is ridiculous. Israel, no matter which way the government is leaning at the time, seems to be responsible for the failures of Palestinian leadership. :dubious:
Israel practices apartheid against the Palestinians. The problems start right there.