Will you answer my questions? If not please say so.
Let us see if we can define and agree, in conceptual terms, on the issue.
Do you think that there are cases where political representation in US Government has been abused and fraud committed where an individual acting as an official of US Government worked either against US interests or put US interests as secondary without disclosing his or her intent?
And, if agreed do you think it is something that should be criminally prosecuted?
FYI, the term and concept “playing the race card” existed long before The Simpson trial as a Google Book search shows.
William Follet’s Modern American Usage, from 1966, lists the phrase.
What I’m saying is that high-ranking officials can tend to be partial to foreign interests if they have a special bond to them. I wouldnt trust much an openly declared zionist that’d hold a crucial position in Mid East policy. Just being Jewish to warrant suspicion sounds a lot like antisemitic bullshit.
The necessity I’m refering to is what usually constitutes conflict of interest. Western world was ok for a long time with people being in a position where such a conflict might arise, as long as nothing wrong was proven. Today this is not deemed to be enough and the mere possibility of such a conflict would normally lead to said individual not being given that position. It can happen with zionism, which by its very nature, has a lot more relays in other countries. But that doesnt mean in any way that Jews, in general, favor more Israel than the country to which they belong. It’s a charge and, contrary to what is happening in this thread, just accusing someone of conflict of interest doesnt magically make the case, you have to prove the situation.
Jews dont have to constantly declare they’re not zionist, anymore than Muslims have an obligation to state they’re not Islamists. In both cases, if they declare themselves as being so, that’s another thing.
More importantly it can and does happen with a lot of foreign interests beyond Israel. Several countries in the Middle East would qualify.
You seem to be making drastic leaps of logic based on an article about a man named Haim Saban who’s both an American and an Israeli citizen who’s not a government official and who has some influence due to his political donations, but not that much.
The fact is, the US has numerous government officials, who were born outside the US who’ve had considerably more influence than Mr. Saban.
For example, there are a number of elected Congressmen who were born in Cuba. Similarly, former Secretary of Labor Elaine Chou was born in Taiwan and the former Chairman of the Joint Chief of Staff, John Shalikashvili, was born in Georgia(then the Soviet Union).
If you want to start looking at people with dual citizenship who have influence without holding any official position, well, then again there are tons of non-Israelis.
For example, only a complete idiot would think that Haim Saban has remotely the kind of influence on the American political scene that the Australian-American Rupert Murdoch does.
Frankly, I suspect that if we were to start counting up the number of powerful, influential American citizens who were born in Cuba versus those born in Israel(or even who hold Israeli citizenship) the former would utterly dwarf the latter.
If you think I’m wrong, start listing powerful Israeli-Americans.
Well, the obvious answer would be to suck at things. Strive for mediocrity.
/agree
Because all black guys instantly react to insult with violence?
So the goal is to create a violent reputation for Jews?
I don’t get it?
What is the catch 22 that is so unique to Jews?
I think people might do it a lot more if some people didn’t use these admissions of error as a weapon against them in future debates or in other aspects of the same debate “you were wrong about that so you are obviously wrong about THIS as well” and if some people were such assholes in their debating style.
I’ve had my position changed or altered on several subjects I have debated on this board.
Thanks for the correction.
I don’t think I’d ever heard the term until Robert Shapiro used it.
So you refuse to answer my questions buy won’t say so, or why you’re refusing. Odd. in case you ever want to identify whatever it is you were trying to say, and what it’s implications are as you see it, let me know.
Oh, and
Of course. You’ve gone on record as saying that you instinctively place any new information that you get into an anti-Israel narrative and have to struggle against that tendency, and that you blame me for your cognitive processes. How could you possibly come to the conclusion that calling such thought patterns out is better than letting them speak for themselves, if you are comfortable blaming the very existence of such ideas in people other than those who hold them?
Intellectual integrity, just like a person’s thoughts, is not the responsibility of other people. An inability to admit error is totally the fault of the person unable to admit mistakes, although the reason they might blame others for their own failings is clear.
Likewise, the best solution to the problem is to wait to speak on a subject until you know the facts. Surprisingly this solution seems more than a little difficult for some. Once one is shown to be wrong, however, they can admit it and learn from their error or attempt to blame those who pointed out their error. As for bringing up past errors (aside from the obvious point that if you avoid making errors you can’t have then pointed out to you), of course that can be relevant. Someone prone to making a certain type of error for a certain type of reason loses credibility on that issue. Again, the solution to such problems is to avoid making mistakes, by always speak v from a position if knowledge and reason, and to make sure that one’s powers of reason are applied properly. Again, for some this seems to be anything but simple, for some reason.
Or folks can always get angry at those who prove them wrong and point out patterns that lead to errors. Probably not the most effective way to improve one’s self, however.
Ah. Then we are parasites. Seriously we can’t win.
Do you really get that from what I wrote? Really? No, because the stereotype that is held is that and the stereotype that is held of Jews is not that that the Israelis would like create a new myth of. Yes those are stereotypes and bigoted. My Dad was a boxer with a short fuse and many Black men are wimps. But those who held prejudices treat people in accordance with them. And since the stereotype of the Jew is more Woody Allen than a inner city tough, behavior follows. Which is why the White lady crosses the street to avoid the scary looking Black man and not guy who looks Jewish (even though reality may be that the later is a rapist and the former a physics professor.)
Certainly many Jews of Israels beginning days wanted to create that image. Sort of. The Jew who won’t get pushed around. The Jew who you want at your side if it comes to a fight. Not the Jew who tries so hard to get along and tries not to make trouble.
Is that so hard to get?
No catch 22. And I have no ability to declare it unique or not. Just a longer history of being “other” and more cycles of rinse repeat than most.
And you are free t think that. I have not experienced that myself. When I’ve admitted error and been convinced of anothers POV I have not ever found that used against me, and when I’ve seen others do it I’ve almost always seen it met with compliments for their honesty and willingness to acknowledge the points that others have made. I just don’t see it all that often.
Yea you! Like I said, I just don’t see it often.
Even more creative is the argument seen in a recent thread here, that that merely stating one’s beliefs cannot constitute bigotry; one must commit bigoted acts for that to be the case. For instance, ranting about the inferiority/evilness of a racial or ethnic group is not bigotry, firebombing their house is. Verbally stirring up hate, no biggie.
I basically agree with the OP. Playing the “Oo, you’re calling me a racist” card is an annoying and ultimately self-defeating method of deflecting criticism. That also goes for its use as a pre-emptive strike - such as when a poster knows they’re about to use language and stereotypes that’ll anger members of the targeted group, but hopes to derail criticism and invoke sympathy for how unfairly the poor dear is about to be reviled. :rolleyes:
P.S. I love the new handle, DarkSeid. Can we use that on the rare occasions when your patience with dipshits runs out and you let 'em have it? 
monstro, I absolutely understand your offense at the idea that blacks are impulsive and violent individuals who will resort to physical blows at the calling of a name. And I myself, when I brought this up, wasn’t even saying that it was true - just that people think it is.
As I said before, an unfair reputation is still a reputation. And the idea of “yeah, why don’t you go down to [insert tough black neighborhood here] and try saying that” is so firmly ingrained in our popular culture that, yes, it was even part of Die Hard 3.
The Jews are a culture that actually has jokes about it along the lines of, “nice Jewish boys don’t do ”, with inevitably being some “tough” or “masculine” thing: playing hockey, joining the military, getting into fights, etc. Now obviously there are actually Jewish boys doing these things, or else the jokes about it wouldn’t exist. But the perception being joked about is the idea that Jews are not “man enough” to do these various things, and this is a perception that has existed for hundreds of years. Is there any other ethnic group on the planet that has this stereotype about them? I don’t think so. There are a hell of a lot of groups who are stereotyped as dumb, and a few that at times in history have been stereotyped as outright evil, but I don’t believe there’s any other people who have been stereotyped as cowardly, weak, and lacking in the ability to physically assert themselves.
Nobody wants to be thought of as weak. Nobody. But I bet there are a lot of people out there who wouldn’t mind being thought of as the kind of person who will kick your ass if you insult him, even if that carries the connotations that the individual is impulsive or even a “brute.”
When the proverbial shit hits the fan, I’d rather be a brute. And I’d rather that people think I’m a brute if that means it’d prevent them from trying to push me around.
I get what you’re saying, Argent, and can kinda sympathize. Perhaps it’s a guy thing to want to be “tough”. But I’m not only a woman, but also one who prides herself on being brainy. The whole brute thing goes against what I value the most in myself. Brutes, by definition, are not smart. I don’t want to be perceived like that, and in my day-to-day life, my intellect is all I have. All I care about, really. Not about scaring some punk kid who wants to call me out of my name. If you’re smart, it really doesn’t matter if you’re physically weak IMHO. Smarts (in my mind) equate to success, wealth, and power. Being physically tough is good if you’re in a fight or doing manual labor…or for scaring the bejesus out of people. But scaring people gets your ass thrown in jail unfairly or shot 44 times. Give me “weak but smart” any day!
Perhaps I’m biased because I’m an ectomorphic nerd who can’t even punch herself out of a paperbag. So it would sting me if someone were to assume that I was stronger than I was smart, just because I’m black. And I guess I still don’t see how that perception protects me or other black people from anything other than individual acts of racial bullying. Except, that’s not even true. At the height of lynching, black people were portrayed as wild and brutish animals just as they are now (except maybe without the hip hop, inner-city edginess). That still didn’t stop 100,000 black folks from being strung up. So…I guess I’m still not quite understanding the full argument ya’ll are making.
Though I certainly understand how belonging to a group that’s portrayed as weak would affect an individual’s psyche negatively.
To be fair monstro on balance Jews get a good hand in the stereotype card deal; being pegged smart nebbishes who control the world is more empowering than it is a hit on our psyches. The times I’ve called a “kike” and a “Jewboy” is exactly one. The subtle benefits of positive stereotyping? Probably throughout my life.
You may be interested in the book that was reviewed by Science here.
Do you have any comments on my post #58 btw? Specifically I am most interested in whether you have an answer to how we Jews should respond to that sort of “evidence”, which is indeed present for each of those potential theses of Jewish agendas.
Calling it out as anti-Semitic (playing the card) doesn’t work too well. Politely debating risks elevating the crazy and how do you answer when indeed Jews are there disproportionately, in almost any of those political movements, in all of those fields? Should we teach our children to strive for mediocrity? If I was an academic German Jew in the 1930’s what could I have done differently than those who were there to alter the events, not just to know to leave and to protect myself, but to combat the rise of the Jew hating as the German economy went sour and it became time, yet again, to blame the handy “other”? What would I do if that did start happening today? How would/will I want my children and future grandchildren to respond?
I honestly struggle with these questions and have no good answer myself. I respond in my way and Finn in his, but I think we both respond from the same place.
Yes, it has a parallel with the experience of Black Americans today but they are different enough that the answers are not necessarily the same.
Any suggestions you have will be appreciated.
In many ways, it’s a catch 22.
Call it out and you have people constructing a narrative (even if the accusations of anti-Semitism are true, as evinced by rhetoric in this and the other thread) in which Jews are hypersensitive crybabies or nasty bullies who use the label of anti-Semitism as a cudgel.
Discuss it and it legitimates the topic as a reasonable issue to be debated, with the truth perhaps lying somewhere in between both sides and the involvement of Jews, in and of itself, being used to show how reasonable the topic is to discuss and Just Ask Questions about.
Ignore it and it may very well still flourish.
Fuck knows if there’s a perfect or even a workable solution. But I do agree, our responses are different paths that start out from the same place and aim at getting to the same destination.
Oh yes, the intention behind the question always matters. There’s not one scientist out there who is completely 100% pure in his or her objectively…it’s simply impossible.
However, let’s say the intention behind the question was not nefarious. A group of researchers may be interested in finding out why (and I’m just pulling this out of my ass, reader, so don’t take this as anything more than a hypothetical) black schizophrenics tend to have poorer outcomes than white schizophrenics, even correcting for family dynamics, socioeconomics, and clinical treatment. It is known that intelligence acts as a protective buffer against psychosis (this part is true). IQ, as far as I know, is the standard metric used for assessing intelligence. Let’s say the reasearchers have the hypothesis that black schizophrenics lack the buffering capacity that white schizophrenics have because of deficits in intellect, therefore explaining why their prognosis tends to be worse (again, I’m making this all up!) So they may design a study where they take black and white schizophrenics and black and white healthy controls, all matched for age, gender, attained educational level, length of illness, drug treatments, etc., and give them all IQ tests. They will also want to give a standard test for schizotypy to all groups, so that they can test for statistical relationships between intelligence level (probably parsed by various categories such as verbal ability and concrete reasoning) and schizotypy scores.
Let’s say the results of their study reveals that blacks, whether sick or not, have significantly lower IQ scores than their white counterparts, and that IQ is also negatively correlated with degrees of schizotypy (as predicted). Thereby, supporting the hypothesis that black schizophrenics tend to have a poorer prognosis than their white counterparts because of their inferior intellect.
I do not see the question, nor the intent behind the question, as automatically nefarious. If it’s an observation that the researchers have routinely seen, then why not study the underlying causes?
The problem that I see is suspecting nefarious intention without any proof of such. Yes, the researchers of the hypothetical may actually be racist individuals who want to prove black inferiority through a round-a-bout approach. That is true…and one will tend to think so if they automatically think any question regarding race and intellect is racist. But if you think about it, their findings could result in better treatments not just blacks, but for a general subgroup of schizophrenics–those with average or below average IQs. Squashing their research because of its implications could prevent improvements in how patients are treated.
As I said, the results of the study would definitely pain me (particularly since I’ve been diagnosed as being on the Sx Spectrum), but I would hope that the scientist in me would not automatically reject the findings based on how it made me feel.
I agree. That this is an obsession of many throughout time and the present has definitely poisoned the well and justifies the suspicion of any study, however innocent, that can be used as justification for black inferiority.
I never said a “first glance” would convince me of anything. The documentary I linked to in the other thread did not convince me of a Jewish conspiracy. But yes, I have to admit it did make me raise my eyebrows in some places. And to be honest, DSeid, no one has yet to debunk, with solid evidence, those “uncomfortable questions” the filmmaker asked in regards to the ADL and pro-Israel lobbying groups. The filmmaker may not have persuaded me, but the arguments put forth in that other thread did not either.
I understand your feelings. But listen, I’m not naive to think any group is above doing ANYTHING nefarious. And when I say “group”, I don’t mean all members of a group. Just like when I say that this country has a long history of racist activities committed by whites…I’m not implicating ALL whites. Just whites who did the racist activities.
I know the pro-Zionist/Jewish Americans-taking-over-the-government conspiracy sounds very similar to all the nutjob conspiracies out there that have been generated about Jews through the centuries. Again, I’m not naive about that either. However, I do recognize that just because what was said in the past was a lie does not mean that everything else said must ALWAYS be a lie too. And I feel I must assert this just in case you misunderstand me–I don’t believe in a Jewish global conspiracy. I just don’t think that, on it’s face, the notion is a lie or that one has to be anti-Semitic to even ponder the question. Because we do have certain truths to contend with:
- Israel is our ally. Not for military reasons or economic reasons, as far as I know. But because Israel is a democractic friend amonst hostile nations.
- Jewish Americans, though small in number, are disproportionately represented in powerful institutions–government or otherwise (and to that, I say good for them).
- Jewish Americans tend to have an affinity towards Israel, as both a cultural homeland and a spiritual one.
- Our loyalty to Israel has placed us on the map for radical Islamic terrorist groups, conceivably putting us in more harm than would be if we were not involved.
- (More questionably…but I’m beginning to think that it’s true) Americans, especially gentiles, who openly question why we are so vested in Israel’s interests are often stigmitized as being anti-Semitic. I know that any sympathy given for Palestinians on the Straight Dope is greeted by lots of hostility…so much so that I think most of us would rather not even speak about it lest we get blasted with scary Walls of Text[sup]TM[/sup]. Not speaking for all black people or Native Americans or any other stigmized group, but I know many of us, in particular, don’t like this at all. When we see one group having such overwhelming control over another group, so that the latter is penalized just for being where they have always lived, it makes us think of the Very Bad Things of the past. Furthermore, when one dares to draw analogies to the Very Bad Things of the past to present-day observations and they are met with scorn and accusations of racism, then that just makes people feel even more vindicated in their beliefs. Perhaps that’s wrong, but I think it’s human nature.
So, taken as a whole, I think there are plenty of reasons why it is not nefarious or bigoted to merely suspect something fishy COULD going on, even though it is a conspiracy and Jews have always been linked to conspiracy. I don’t think people should believe any claim based on gut instinct. Guts are often wrong. But likewise I don’t think people should reject claims based on gut instinct either, especially if there is supportive proof. Now we can argue whether the supportive proof is good or not…that makes for a substantial debate. But to throw out the question before one can even look at the evidence, merely because the question makes us uncomfortable…well, I can’t get with that. I again go back to COINTEPROL. Your average American wouldn’t have believed all the things the FBI did to besmirch the reputations of black leaders during the 60s and 70s, and would have called out anyone accusing the government of such activity as being unpatriotic. But if one had objectively examined the historical realities and truths on the ground at the time (the history of racism in the country, the history of truth-distortion by governments in general, the fact that black activism wasn’t nearly as violent or scary as what was made out to be, the fact that J. Edgar Hoover was a racist), then we can see that it isn’t irrational paranoia to wonder about the existence of COINTEPROL.
I don’t think Jews are everwhere, like my father does (bless his wackjob heart). I just don’t think individuals or groups of Jewish people are beyond reproach. I just don’t think that the claim that there are groups of Jewish Americans doing things on behalf of Israel, damned the consequences to the US, to be all that improbable. I would feel that way for any ethnic group with a homeland supported, in part, by American tax dollars. And I sincerely hope that you believe me when I say this.
To be honest, I don’t know. And it’s an excellent question! Perhaps we need another “Moorish” documentary to deconstruct the idea and disprove every element of it. For those who are already true believers, it wouldn’t effective. But for people like me who aren’t bending one way or the other, it would at least be a starting point. Otherwise, the other voices are going to be the ones who are listened to and believed.
Sorry for not addressing your questions earlier. I didn’t know how to respond to them when I first read them, but I’ve decided to take a stab at them at your request.
Thank you for the answer. Again, if all the process here accomplishes is a better understanding of another’s POV it is still accomplishing something, even if no opinions are changed.
As to the IQ issue - sure, if that was the answer to my question “why do you ask?” then, to some degree, fine. Although I would be the critical consumer of information and remind the researchers that hypothetically demonstrating a biologic predisposition to have less protective intellectual reserve would not preclude the possibility that access to and quality of mental health care resources was not also a factor. Or that different biologic responses to the medications was not a factor. Or that having enough Black Americans included in trials of treatment protocols that they may not respond to in exactly the same way was not also a factor. And I’d be interested in seeing that they looked at how much variance about the mean there was as well, and how much of a factor that may or may not play. IF they were thinking that demonstrating such a circumstance was enough to disprove the role of other cultural, societal, and environmental factors, and that therefore those would need not be considered as remediable factors contributing to disparate outcomes, I’d argue with them quite a bit. Hypothetically.
I will engage a bit further to point out that you numbered truths are mostly debatable assertions to some degree.
-
There are historical reasons and geopolitical ones that the US is allied with Israel. Being a fellow democracy has only a very little to do with it. If you’d like whole discussion covering why the US has backed Israel for reasons of Realpolitik, different ones as the years progress, I’d be happy to have it, but it may need its own thread.
-
Granted. Again, it is true that Jews are everywhere. There are even more Jews in the Pro-Palestinian anti-Israel movement than our numbers would suggest. Each Jew may have a different idea of what “Justice” is, but we all had it beat into us from very early on that we should work to achieve it … which then has some of us working very hard against each other!
-
Statistically speaking granted. For a variety of reasons.
-
I really do not think so. After all various EU countries historically friendly to the Palestinian cause are on the map too. The West is targeted for the same reason that Israel is targeted: it serves various sub-group interests to have a demonized other. Those who oppress their own can keep their distracted by the outside threat. Those who want to draw the Arab world back away from becoming integrated in the world’s community of communities and into a more insular fundamentalism also need an outside threat to evoke. You may or may not agree with that analysis, but it is at least a debate, not an established truth.
-
I am glad that you see it as questionable. Rarely are people here accused of anti-Semitism for merely having Pro-Palestinian, Pro-Arab, or anti-Israel positions. Among the posters here who are usually pegged as “Pro-Israel” not a one has not criticized various decisions by various Israeli administrations. Yes, that includes Finn. The accusation of the disloyal Jew get under many a craw, I’ll grant that, and I think by now you can understand why. Especially when even a Jewish sounding name is enough to declare someone as not to be trusted. As to the rest of you comment of whose is being punished by whom and for what … it would be another long thread to discuss how I see things a bit differently than how you’ve presented it, and that digression would take up more time than I think either of us wants to spend!
Thank you again for your response.
Actually Israel become our ally, in fact more than name, after the 1967 war when it became clear that we could use Israel as a counterweight to the soviet-dominated Arab states. Israel also offers us the benefits of a potential port in the middle east and potential staging grounds should we have to deploy in force there. We also get the (debatable) benefit of access to Israel’s intelligence services.
Bin Laden’s objections, for instance, also included massive anger over our troops being stationed in Saudi Arabia. There is a massive petrodollar influence on American politics, and the Saudis in particular has significant political impact (and were advising that we attack Iran, for example).
Some are. And that’s because some are.
The only thing more absurd than the notion that everybody who criticizes our nation’s relationship with Israel is called an anti-Semite is that nobody who criticizes our relationship with Israel is an anti-Semite. And doesn’t that make sense? If someone is a racist against Jews, would they really be all that unlikely to attack American Jews and the Jewish state? And of course there are valid reasons for criticism.
You sure? Can you cite all the hostility that the following was greeted with?
If I was Jewish I might be reluctant to point this out, but Jews are “over-represented” in any field that requires superior intelligence. This is because the average IQ for Ashkenazic Jews is 112. It is not because of a Jewish conspiracy.
I guess we’ll end the thread on that cheerful note?
Alrighty then!