Anti-Zionism does not equal anti-Semitism

 
lynmc
 
Avatar
 
 
lynmc
Total Posts:  379
Joined  03-08-2014
 
 
 
11 October 2017 13:51
 

Moshe Machover presents a cogent argument, for which he was expelled from the British Labour party:

http://labourpartymarxists.org.uk/wp-content/uploads/LPM17-web.pdf

The attempt by zionists to equate anti-Israel or anti-Zionist speech to anti-semitic speech has been going on for as long as I can remember.  If I were Jewish, I wouldn’t want my ethnicity/religion linked to Israel, a state founded on mass murder, terror and ethnic cleansing of its indigenous people in order to establish a Jewish majority.  Nor would I want my ethnicity linked to zionism, a political movement that set its goal of removing the indigenous people of Palestine (at least the mainstream did), by any means necessary, in order to create a Jewish state there.

The 1917 era British Conjoint Committee of the Board of Deputies and the Anglo-Jewish Association deplored the [zionist] “... proposal to invest the Jewish settlers [in Palestine] with certain special rights in excess of those enjoyed by the rest of the population” (quote taken from linked article).  They thought zionism was a form of what today we would call racism or bigotry back then.  Jewish anti-zionists (see http://www.ijan.org/tag/us/) in today’s era apparently do as well.

I don’t think, in general, that anti-Israel or anti-zionist sentiment is anti-semitic, nor do I think Israel represents Judaism or Jewishness.  Comments?

Edit: Moshe Machover was banned from the British Labour party for writing the opinion, it’s unclear that he was a member.

[ Edited: 19 October 2017 19:28 by lynmc]
 
Brick Bungalow
 
Avatar
 
 
Brick Bungalow
Total Posts:  4842
Joined  28-05-2009
 
 
 
17 October 2017 20:28
 

Some of the most strident and detailed objections to the actions of the Jewish state come from Orthodox Rabbis. Presumably this is not motivated by antisemitism.

 
lynmc
 
Avatar
 
 
lynmc
Total Posts:  379
Joined  03-08-2014
 
 
 
19 October 2017 19:44
 
Brick Bungalow - 17 October 2017 08:28 PM

Some of the most strident and detailed objections to the actions of the Jewish state come from Orthodox Rabbis. Presumably this is not motivated by antisemitism.

Yes, there’s a strain of Judaism that objects to the Jewish state on religious grounds, as a Jewish state was only supposed to arise after the coming of the Messiah.  See here: http://www.nkusa.org/aboutus/index.cfm.  There are some others (not sure they’re orthodox) who object to the actions of the Jewish state out of human rights concerns (see https://rabbibrant.com/2017/05/07/why-i-support-the-palestinian-law-of-return/)

 
ubique13
 
Avatar
 
 
ubique13
Total Posts:  860
Joined  10-03-2017
 
 
 
27 October 2017 07:07
 
lynmc - 19 October 2017 07:44 PM
Brick Bungalow - 17 October 2017 08:28 PM

Some of the most strident and detailed objections to the actions of the Jewish state come from Orthodox Rabbis. Presumably this is not motivated by antisemitism.

Yes, there’s a strain of Judaism that objects to the Jewish state on religious grounds, as a Jewish state was only supposed to arise after the coming of the Messiah.  See here: http://www.nkusa.org/aboutus/index.cfm.  There are some others (not sure they’re orthodox) who object to the actions of the Jewish state out of human rights concerns (see https://rabbibrant.com/2017/05/07/why-i-support-the-palestinian-law-of-return/)

As a completely secular Jew, and devout skeptic, it has been my experience that the overwhelming majority of any criticisms espousing anti-Zionism are inextricably linked to anti-Semitism (as one might expect when the concept has become conflated to ostensibly represent the entire Jewish Diaspora). That said, this “issue” has existed for 2,500+ years (?), and there is apparently a large swath of individuals who actually believe that the blood feuds that they’ve been born into are the means toward their divinely righteous end. Because it was written.

 
 
lynmc
 
Avatar
 
 
lynmc
Total Posts:  379
Joined  03-08-2014
 
 
 
29 October 2017 14:57
 
ubique13 - 27 October 2017 07:07 AM
lynmc - 19 October 2017 07:44 PM
Brick Bungalow - 17 October 2017 08:28 PM

Some of the most strident and detailed objections to the actions of the Jewish state come from Orthodox Rabbis. Presumably this is not motivated by antisemitism.

Yes, there’s a strain of Judaism that objects to the Jewish state on religious grounds, as a Jewish state was only supposed to arise after the coming of the Messiah.  See here: http://www.nkusa.org/aboutus/index.cfm.  There are some others (not sure they’re orthodox) who object to the actions of the Jewish state out of human rights concerns (see https://rabbibrant.com/2017/05/07/why-i-support-the-palestinian-law-of-return/)

As a completely secular Jew, and devout skeptic, it has been my experience that the overwhelming majority of any criticisms espousing anti-Zionism are inextricably linked to anti-Semitism (as one might expect when the concept has become conflated to ostensibly represent the entire Jewish Diaspora). That said, this “issue” has existed for 2,500+ years (?), and there is apparently a large swath of individuals who actually believe that the blood feuds that they’ve been born into are the means toward their divinely righteous end. Because it was written.

What precisely do you mean by “linked?”

I’ve no doubt some anti-Zionist criticism is also anti-semitic.  Victims of zionism have also conflated Jews with Zionists.  That being Zionist organizations have made a concerted, directed effort to conflate anti-zionism with anti-semitism, and Jews with Zionists - that seems to me the main linkage.  Mainstream anti-Zionists (pretty much all leftists, against all forms of racism like Moshe above), are careful to differentiate the two and eschew anti-semitism even if expressed as anti-zionism.  So are so how do you arrive at your “overwhelming majority” linkage figure?

 

 
ubique13
 
Avatar
 
 
ubique13
Total Posts:  860
Joined  10-03-2017
 
 
 
30 October 2017 09:58
 
lynmc - 29 October 2017 02:57 PM

What precisely do you mean by “linked?”

I’ve no doubt some anti-Zionist criticism is also anti-semitic.  Victims of zionism have also conflated Jews with Zionists.  That being Zionist organizations have made a concerted, directed effort to conflate anti-zionism with anti-semitism, and Jews with Zionists - that seems to me the main linkage.  Mainstream anti-Zionists (pretty much all leftists, against all forms of racism like Moshe above), are careful to differentiate the two and eschew anti-semitism even if expressed as anti-zionism.  So are so how do you arrive at your “overwhelming majority” linkage figure?

The State of Israel is the only country in the world where Judaism is the national religion. A war crime is a war crime is a war crime, no matter who commits it. To place the blame of a single Prime Minister and his fanatic cronies (I know, it’s happened before, I get it) on the entirety of the world’s Jewish Diaspora is uncomfortably close to the assertion that all Jews were Christ-killers - until the Holocaust, at which point they could be forgiven. I want for there to be meaningful peace talks which lead to an actual reconciliation to whatever extent that such a thing can be accomplished, but having said that, I also recognize that if there were an easy solution then there would be no problem.

[Edit: Since I probably didn’t sufficiently address your intended argument, I think it’s fucking appalling that the Anglicans want to extricate themselves from their colonial presence/influence over the British Mandate of Palestine, distance themselves from any association with Herzl, and pretend that Henry Balfour (and Lawrence of Arabia) weren’t agents acting in the name of the English Crown.]

[ Edited: 30 October 2017 10:10 by ubique13]
 
 
lynmc
 
Avatar
 
 
lynmc
Total Posts:  379
Joined  03-08-2014
 
 
 
01 November 2017 10:26
 
ubique13 - 30 October 2017 09:58 AM

The State of Israel is the only country in the world where Judaism is the national religion. ...

 

Yes, and it’s a poor example, having been established by means of mass murder and terror against the indigenous people of the territory, the confiscation of their land, buildings (excluding the 500 or so villages blown up to prevent the return of the villager), businesses, furniture, artworks, vehicles, tools, jewelry, silverware and much of their funds for the benefit of Jews.  I don’t blame all Jews for this or even all Zionists (although the Zionist movement is almost entirely to blame).  But when you say Israel is “The Jewish State,” are you saying the mass murder and ethnic cleansing campaign to establish it is a “Jewish” endeavor?

... A war crime is a war crime is a war crime, no matter who commits it. To place the blame of a single Prime Minister and his fanatic cronies (I know, it’s happened before, I get it) on the entirety of the world’s Jewish Diaspora is uncomfortably close to the assertion that all Jews were Christ-killers - until the Holocaust, at which point they could be forgiven. I want for there to be meaningful peace talks which lead to an actual reconciliation to whatever extent that such a thing can be accomplished, but having said that, I also recognize that if there were an easy solution then there would be no problem.

 

If you’re referring to Netanyahu, pretty much every Israeli prime minister has committed war crimes.  Some are more fanatical, some less.  Meaningful peace talks would be good, I tend to agree with the rest of your statements if I get your meaning.

[Edit: Since I probably didn’t sufficiently address your intended argument, I think it’s fucking appalling that the Anglicans want to extricate themselves from their colonial presence/influence over the British Mandate of Palestine, distance themselves from any association with Herzl, and pretend that Henry Balfour (and Lawrence of Arabia) weren’t agents acting in the name of the English Crown.]

Tend to agree.

[ Edited: 01 November 2017 10:39 by lynmc]
 
ubique13
 
Avatar
 
 
ubique13
Total Posts:  860
Joined  10-03-2017
 
 
 
01 November 2017 11:35
 
lynmc - 01 November 2017 10:26 AM

Yes, and it’s a poor example, having been established by means of mass murder and terror against the indigenous people of the territory, the confiscation of their land, buildings (excluding the 500 or so villages blown up to prevent the return of the villager), businesses, furniture, artworks, vehicles, tools, jewelry, silverware and much of their funds for the benefit of Jews.  I don’t blame all Jews for this or even all Zionists (although the Zionist movement is almost entirely to blame).  But when you say Israel is “The Jewish State,” are you saying the mass murder and ethnic cleansing campaign to establish it is a “Jewish” endeavor?

... A war crime is a war crime is a war crime, no matter who commits it. To place the blame of a single Prime Minister and his fanatic cronies (I know, it’s happened before, I get it) on the entirety of the world’s Jewish Diaspora is uncomfortably close to the assertion that all Jews were Christ-killers - until the Holocaust, at which point they could be forgiven. I want for there to be meaningful peace talks which lead to an actual reconciliation to whatever extent that such a thing can be accomplished, but having said that, I also recognize that if there were an easy solution then there would be no problem.

 

If you’re referring to Netanyahu, pretty much every Israeli prime minister has committed war crimes.  Some are more fanatical, some less.  Meaningful peace talks would be good, I tend to agree with the rest of your statements if I get your meaning.

[Edit: Since I probably didn’t sufficiently address your intended argument, I think it’s fucking appalling that the Anglicans want to extricate themselves from their colonial presence/influence over the British Mandate of Palestine, distance themselves from any association with Herzl, and pretend that Henry Balfour (and Lawrence of Arabia) weren’t agents acting in the name of the English Crown.]

Tend to agree.

I suspect that this tendency to agree would hold true if we spoke more generally about the past 2,500 years or so. Most Jews that live in the State of Israel are of Ashkenazi descent (as are most Jews still alive today), which is obviously a bit problematic the second one realizes that of the three main “Jewish” ethnic groups, the origin of the Ashkenazi people can only be traced as far back as the eighth century CE. It would stand to reason that the Israelites of scripture were the Mizrahi and Sephardic people, and that the Ashkenazi came to be included in the religion through some still-unknown external factor.

When I alluded to the State of Israel being the only nation whose official religion is Judaism, I was trying to convey how difficult it has been made for any Jew living outside of the State of Israel to present a nuanced criticism (deliberately, I would tend to think). It sickens me that there are fanatic Jews who behave in the manner of Netanyahu and his ultra-Orthodox cronies. There is no metric of perversion by which a supposedly devout individual might create their own private “Israel” while perpetuating a militaristic appartheid State, whose ultimate goal appears, quite plainly, to be ethnic cleansing and the “reclaiming” of the Temple Mount - as the means to bring about the end of the world.

I won’t pretend to know what eventually caused the schism to form in relations between the world’s Islamic and Jewish populations, but given the information that can be gleaned regarding the relationship that Maimonides and Saladin had, it would hardly be a stretch of the imagination to think that this bit of politicking was manufactured by the Crusaders. Fuck the Holy Roman Empire (is it time to call it ‘American’, yet?).

 

 
 
lynmc
 
Avatar
 
 
lynmc
Total Posts:  379
Joined  03-08-2014
 
 
 
02 November 2017 11:04
 
ubique13 - 01 November 2017 11:35 AM
lynmc - 01 November 2017 10:26 AM

Yes, and it’s a poor example, having been established by means of mass murder and terror against the indigenous people of the territory, the confiscation of their land, buildings (excluding the 500 or so villages blown up to prevent the return of the villager), businesses, furniture, artworks, vehicles, tools, jewelry, silverware and much of their funds for the benefit of Jews.  I don’t blame all Jews for this or even all Zionists (although the Zionist movement is almost entirely to blame).  But when you say Israel is “The Jewish State,” are you saying the mass murder and ethnic cleansing campaign to establish it is a “Jewish” endeavor?

... A war crime is a war crime is a war crime, no matter who commits it. To place the blame of a single Prime Minister and his fanatic cronies (I know, it’s happened before, I get it) on the entirety of the world’s Jewish Diaspora is uncomfortably close to the assertion that all Jews were Christ-killers - until the Holocaust, at which point they could be forgiven. I want for there to be meaningful peace talks which lead to an actual reconciliation to whatever extent that such a thing can be accomplished, but having said that, I also recognize that if there were an easy solution then there would be no problem.

 

If you’re referring to Netanyahu, pretty much every Israeli prime minister has committed war crimes.  Some are more fanatical, some less.  Meaningful peace talks would be good, I tend to agree with the rest of your statements if I get your meaning.

[Edit: Since I probably didn’t sufficiently address your intended argument, I think it’s fucking appalling that the Anglicans want to extricate themselves from their colonial presence/influence over the British Mandate of Palestine, distance themselves from any association with Herzl, and pretend that Henry Balfour (and Lawrence of Arabia) weren’t agents acting in the name of the English Crown.]

Tend to agree.

I suspect that this tendency to agree would hold true if we spoke more generally about the past 2,500 years or so. Most Jews that live in the State of Israel are of Ashkenazi descent (as are most Jews still alive today), which is obviously a bit problematic the second one realizes that of the three main “Jewish” ethnic groups, the origin of the Ashkenazi people can only be traced as far back as the eighth century CE. It would stand to reason that the Israelites of scripture were the Mizrahi and Sephardic people, and that the Ashkenazi came to be included in the religion through some still-unknown external factor.

 

I recommend Shlomo Sand’s book, “The invention of the Jewish people”.  Apparently, early Jewish people were great proselytizers, and Judaism spread this way throughout the Roman empire in the first centuries CE.  Before Christianity won out and squelched it.  A lot of middle eastern and north African Jews are descendants of the communities who converted Judaism outside Palestine also.  Though probably early Jewish proselytizers spread a bit of genetic material along with the religion.

When I alluded to the State of Israel being the only nation whose official religion is Judaism, I was trying to convey how difficult it has been made for any Jew living outside of the State of Israel to present a nuanced criticism (deliberately, I would tend to think). It sickens me that there are fanatic Jews who behave in the manner of Netanyahu and his ultra-Orthodox cronies. There is no metric of perversion by which a supposedly devout individual might create their own private “Israel” while perpetuating a militaristic appartheid State, whose ultimate goal appears, quite plainly, to be ethnic cleansing and the “reclaiming” of the Temple Mount - as the means to bring about the end of the world.

 

Sideways, by criticizing identity politics?

I don’t know why Jews outside Israel want to take a state founded by mass murder and deliberate ethnic cleansing of it’s indigenous people as part of their identity.  At least, the ones who profess to support equal rights, freedom of religion and so forth, which is almost every Jew I have enough acquaintance with to know about.  Of course, to a certain extent we’re handed our identities.

I won’t pretend to know what eventually caused the schism to form in relations between the world’s Islamic and Jewish populations, but given the information that can be gleaned regarding the relationship that Maimonides and Saladin had, it would hardly be a stretch of the imagination to think that this bit of politicking was manufactured by the Crusaders. Fuck the Holy Roman Empire (is it time to call it ‘American’, yet?).

 

Yeah, there seems to be a certain commonality among empires.

 
ubique13
 
Avatar
 
 
ubique13
Total Posts:  860
Joined  10-03-2017
 
 
 
02 November 2017 11:40
 
lynmc - 02 November 2017 11:04 AM

...if I get your meaning…

The operative word here being ‘if’. You don’t, and I have no desire to elaborate further on my views in regards to the modern State of Israel (part of the American empire to some extent, I suppose, as it is of extremely high strategic value).

I understand what it means to belong to a diaspora, and I have a pretty clear picture of what went wrong.


[Edit: As I didn’t realize what I was dealing with earlier, I feel it’s only appropriate to borrow a line from ‘A Serious Man’: “Who cares about the goy?”]

[ Edited: 02 November 2017 11:45 by ubique13]
 
 
lynmc
 
Avatar
 
 
lynmc
Total Posts:  379
Joined  03-08-2014
 
 
 
02 November 2017 13:41
 
ubique13 - 02 November 2017 11:40 AM
lynmc - 02 November 2017 11:04 AM

...if I get your meaning…

The operative word here being ‘if’. You don’t, and I have no desire to elaborate further on my views in regards to the modern State of Israel (part of the American empire to some extent, I suppose, as it is of extremely high strategic value).

I understand what it means to belong to a diaspora, and I have a pretty clear picture of what went wrong.

[Edit: As I didn’t realize what I was dealing with earlier, I feel it’s only appropriate to borrow a line from ‘A Serious Man’: “Who cares about the goy?”]

Ah, I see, you’re a believer in male supremacy and/or Judeo supremacy.  The link has it wrong, Asharat really was the consort of El.  Well, no use talking any more.

 

 
ubique13
 
Avatar
 
 
ubique13
Total Posts:  860
Joined  10-03-2017
 
 
 
02 November 2017 14:20
 
lynmc - 02 November 2017 01:41 PM

Ah, I see, you’re a believer in male supremacy and/or Judeo supremacy.  The link has it wrong, Asharat really was the consort of El.  Well, no use talking any more.

Interesting conclusions. Seek professional [medical] help. Or don’t.

 
 
Mahound
 
Avatar
 
 
Mahound
Total Posts:  3
Joined  09-12-2017
 
 
 
09 December 2017 16:27
 

Zionism is an IDEOLOGY.  Jews are a [hodge-podge] RACE OF PEOPLE.

Granted — there are Zionist Jews.  However, to tar all Jews as Zionists, is not only using a broadsword where a scalpel is required, but a fundamentally ignorant and fallacious supposition: “I’m a Zionist.  You don’t have to be a Jew to be a Zionist.” (Joe Biden)