PDA

View Full Version : Is Israel an evolving facist state?



Odelay
11-08-2013, 02:38 AM
A very good read. I had to do a double take when seeing this review published in The American Conservative, because Max Blumenthal is no friend to American conservatives, but it does point to a certain balance within this publication that is lacking in other center-right news organs. --Odelay

Will Israel Go Fascist?

Goliath: Life and Loathing in Greater Israel (https://www.amazon.com/dp/1568586345/ref=as_li_ss_til?tag=theamericonse-20&camp=0&creative=0&linkCode=as4&creativeASIN=1568586345&adid=0EZGN2K1QCKSJJ26WWMB&), Max Blumenthal, Nation Books, 512 pages

By Scott McConnell (http://www.theamericanconservative.com/author/scott-mcconnell) • November 6, 2013 (http://www.theamericanconservative.com/articles/will-israel-go-fascist/) http://www.theamericanconservative.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/11/isreal_goliath1-color.jpg by Michael Hogue

Max Blumenthal’s sprawling portrait of contemporary Israel is far more a work of journalism than political theory. It largely avoids sustained argument or analysis, allowing its main points to be inferred through the words of Israelis and Palestinians and short contemporary or historical descriptions, presented in several dozen vignette-like chapters. This is nonetheless a bold and shocking book, presenting persuasively a major theoretical and polemical argument about Israel almost completely at odds with the image most Americans have of it.

In Goliath, America’s foremost partner in the Middle East is not the humanistic and ever resourceful “David” using guile to vanquish surrounding brutes, but a militaristic and racist state whose electoral majorities have set it on a trajectory towards fascism, if it isn’t there already. Even those generally well-informed about Israel and its occupation of the Palestinian territories will have their views challenged by Blumenthal’s sharp eye and deadpan factual presentations.

Goliath eschews the standard liberal Zionist position that a relatively virtuous and democratic Israel was driven off course by some combination of the post-1967 occupation of territory won in the se-Day War, the burgeoning political power of the settlers, the authoritarian political culture of Russian immigrants, or the swelling political clout of Jews from North Africa and the Arab world. For Blumenthal, Israel’s 1967 victory was not a turning point so much as a new opportunity to implement the ethnic-cleansing ideology present at the state’s creation.

To a degree that has no clear equal among American journalists who cover the Mideast, Blumenthal is versed in the history of the 1948 war that created Israel, with its multiple expulsions of Palestinians from their towns followed by wiping those towns off the map. His narrative makes regular connections between this past and the present. For instance, a section on security procedures in Ben Gurion Airport is introduced by a description of the massacre of civilians in the Arab town of Lydda in 1948 that was followed by a forced march of 55,000 survivors to Ramallah, the so-called Lydda Death March. Lydda was then Hebraicized to “Lod,” site of the international airport where visitors to Israel and the occupied territories are now sorted by ethnicity before interrogation, their electronic devices often searched or seized.

Another episode: during the 1970s, the Jewish National Fund planted fir trees to cover the ruins of three Palestinian towns Israel had bulldozed in the aftermath of the 1967 war. The trees were nonindigenous to the region, though they reminded some Israelis of Switzerland. Three years ago, they burned in a huge forest fire Israel could not control. Some who fled the conflagration came from nearby Ein Hod, which once was an Arab town built of stone houses. In the 1950s, an Israeli artist lobbied for Israel to preserve the houses as studios instead of bulldozing them as planned, and the town was turned into a tourist destination. When Blumenthal visited, a young woman acknowledged that the bar in which they were sitting was in fact a converted mosque. “Yeah, but that’s how all of Israel is … built on top of Arab villages. Maybe it’s best to let bygones be bygones.”

Such a sentiment may have some practical utility and might be spoken in good faith, but from a citizen of a country where so much national culture is derived from remembrance of wrongs done to Jews, its lack of self-awareness is remarkable.

Not all the past memories are bitter. Blumenthal tells the story of Benjamin Dunkelman, a Canadian officer who volunteered to lead troops in Israel’s War of Independence. After signing a local peace pact with the notables of Nazareth, a cultural and economic center of Palestinian Christians, Dunkelman received a general’s orders to expel the inhabitants. He refused. When the general sought a formal written order to override Dunkelman, David Ben Gurion, who had given such orders before with a wave of the hand, balked at putting them in writing. So Palestinian Nazarenes, both Christian and Muslim, continue to live in Israel today.

A story of one of them, Hanin Zoabi, is told in one of Goliath’s pivotal chapters. Blumenthal arrived in Israel shortly before the Mavi Marmara affair, when a flotilla of boats sailed from Turkey with provisions to alleviate the blockade Israel had imposed on Gaza, the strip of territory it had evacuated settlers from in 2005 and then pulverized three years later. Israeli officials joked that Gazans, a majority of whom were suffering from what the United Nations called “food insecurity,” were having “an appointment with a dietician” and emailed to journalists sarcastic remarks about the menus of Gazan restaurants. As the flotilla approached, the Israeli military and Hebrew-language press ginned up a great panic about the boats, with their crews of aging European peace activists and a few Palestinian politicians. While the organizers assumed that Israel would relent and allow the provisions through, Israel sent commandos on helicopters and attack dinghies to storm the ship.

When some passengers resisted by throwing bottles and debris at the boarders, Israeli commandos replied with live ammunition. Nine passengers were killed, including a 19-year-old Turkish-American, shot in the face execution-style while lying wounded on the deck. Israel eventually apologized to Turkey for the incident and will probably pay compensation. But Blumenthal recounts with some astonishment that an overwhelming majority of the Israeli public felt their country’s brutal treatment of unarmed peace activists on the high seas was perfectly justified.

In the aftermath, the IDF went into public-relations mode. Israeli soldiers gathered up knives from the boat’s kitchen and laid them out in a photographic display with several Qurans, supposedly evidence the Mavi Marmara was leading an Islamist terror convoy. Israel jailed the surviving passengers and confiscated their laptops and electronic equipment. The IDF doctored a sound clip to make it appear that flotilla organizers were crazed anti-Semites. Outside the Turkish embassy, Israeli demonstrators railed against Turkey. Blumenthal interviewed several of them, who ranged from self-described peaceniks to Meir Kahane supporters. “The longer I spoke with the demonstrators,” he relates, “the more likely they were to merge their nightmare visions of the flotilla activists as hardcore agents of the Islamic Republic of Iran and al Qaeda with Holocaust demons. ‘Everything is against the Jews and we have the right to defend ourselves.’ ‘No matter what we do everything is against us—everybody. And we know we’re right’.”

This sentiment was echoed in the Knesset, when Hanin Zoabi, a 38-year-old Palestinian representative from Nazereth, elected by one of the Arab parties, instigated a virtual legislative riot by challenging Israel’s right to board the Mavi Marmara on the high seas. Zoabi holds a master’s degree from Hebrew University and had been a feminist activist prior to her election in 2009. She was on the boat, and after the assault began she grabbed a loudspeaker and used her Hebrew to try to get soldiers to stop killing unarmed passengers. Returning to the Knesset two weeks after the incident, she was interrupted by shouts of “terrorist” and “go back to Gaza” while the Likud speaker of the legislature tried in vain to restore order.

A member of Yisrael Beiteinu, one of Israel’s governing right-wing parties, presented Zoabi with a mock Iranian passport. Michael Ben Ari, a follower of the late Rabbi Meir Kahane—whose party had been banned for racial incitement in the 1980s—initiated a measure to strip Zoabi of her parliamentary privileges. It passed with minimal opposition. The next week Zoabi was deprived of her diplomatic passport. The Knesset then passed a bill, called the “anti-Incitement act,” promising to criminalize speech that could be characterized as disloyal.

These maneuvers reflected a broader popular spirit: an Israeli grocer offered free groceries for life to anyone who would assassinate the Nazarene legislator, while an “Execute Zoabi” Facebook page was created, attracting hundreds of supporters. No one in the Knesset and few in the media protested. Blumenthal sardonically concludes, “shouting down Arab lawmakers had become a form of electioneering.”

Sadly, the episode was in sync with Israel’s broader political culture. Was the verbal violence against a Knesset member more troubling than the regular chants of “Death to the Arabs” shouted out at Israeli soccer stadiums? More menacing than legislation designed to impede marriages between Israeli citizens and West Bank Palestinians? More detestable than the Jerusalem celebrations of the life of Baruch Goldstein, a Jewish-American doctor who murdered 29 Muslim worshipers in Hebron in 1994? Or the provocation parades through Arab neighborhoods in Jerusalem, where hundreds of young Israelis and American Zionists join together to march the narrow streets of Jerusalem’s Old City, booming the Hebrew slogans “Muhammed is Dead!” and “Slaughter the Arabs”? Or the mob violence young Israelis carried out against Arabs in the center of Jerusalem? Or the fact that followers of Kahane sitting in Parliament boast that the late rabbi’s vision is now widespread in Israel’s governing parties?

Since the 1920s there has been a word in Western discourse for this style of politics. The Israeli leftists and dissidents who became Blumenthal’s friends have now taken it up. “‘Fascism’ was a word the leftists used almost invariably,” writes Blumenthal, “as they told me about having their homes defaced with graffiti, death threats by right-wing thugs or about being summoned to interrogation.” Speaking with journalist Lia Tarachansky on a Tel Aviv bus, Blumenthal probed what Israelis meant by the word. How could she claim fascism was in the air when anti-Zionists like her were permitted to conduct their journalistic and political activities freely?

The Israeli replied:
To explain fascism in Israel, it’s not that easy … it’s so depressing I usually repress my thoughts about it. But if you really want me to define it, then I’d tell you it’s not just the anti-democratic laws, it’s not the consensus for occupation, it’s not the massive right-wing coalition government, it’s not watching the people who ask questions and think critically being interrogated by the Shabbak. What it really is, is a feeling that you have sitting on a bus being afraid to speak Arabic with your Palestinian friends.
A young woman who had overheard their conversation interrupted to ask Blumenthal, “You with Israel or Turkiya?”

Blumenthal and his Israeli friends were not the first to broach the subject of fascism; the word has some history in Israel as a term of denigration against the right by the Zionist left. But is there substance behind the charge today? Or is this simply another variant of the promiscuous use of “fascist” as an epithet, in the style of the American New Left of the 1960s?

One scholar who has at least tangentially addressed this is Robert Paxton, an eminent Columbia historian and one of the world’s leading scholars of fascism, the author of a prize-winning work on Vichy France’s murderous persecution of Jews. In his last book, The Anatomy of Fascism, published in 2003, Paxton speculated on fascism as a continuing menace beyond Europe and the interwar era. “If religious fascisms are possible,” he wrote, “one must address the potential—supreme irony—for fascism in Israel.” He noted that Israeli national identity is associated with human rights, long denied to Jews in the Diaspora. But he also observes Israel’s demographic shift away from European Jews to Jews from North Africa and the Mideast (and today Russia), where democratic traditions are far weaker.

“By 2002,” Paxton continued, “it was possible to hear language within the right wing of the Likud Party and some of the small religious parties that comes close to the functional equivalent of fascism. The chosen people begins to sound like a Master Race … that demonizes an enemy that obstructs the realization of the people’s destiny.”

Surveying the “mobilizing passions” of fascism, Paxton lists among others “the primacy of the group, toward which one has duties superior to every right, whether individual or universal, and the subordination of the individual to it” and “the belief that one’s group is a victim, a sentiment that justifies any action, without legal or moral limits, against its enemies both internal and external.” A reader of Goliath will find a people thoroughly marinated in such sentiment.

Blumenthal closes his book with a short chapter on Israeli expatriates: fully 13 percent of Israelis now reside abroad. The United States and Germany are the most favored destinations. “The Exodus Party,” he calls them. In Brooklyn, Blumenthal encounters several Israeli expats, including Rafi Magnes—the grandson of Judah Magnes, a famous Reform rabbi who was a founder and former president of Hebrew University in Jerusalem—along with his wife, Liz. The latter relates, “We could have stayed of course, but the fascism had gotten to be too overwhelming.”

Is the situation really so dire? Blumenthal arrived in Israel shortly after the election of Israel’s most right-wing Knesset ever. Those inclined to optimism can assert that that this election represented a high tide; more recent election results were somewhat more centrist.

The Israel Goliath depicts would probably not be denied by liberal Zionists like Peter Beinart or the leaders of J Street. But they would argue that the proto-fascism is neither as widely nor deeply entrenched, nor as truly representative of the essential Israel as Blumenthal maintains, and that a fair settlement with the Palestinians could break the fever of racism and allow more sensible leaders to re-emerge as Israel’s dominant voices. They could point out, as well, that Israel remains a functioning democracy for its Jewish citizens and at least guarantees some rights to others, while true fascist regimes—if popular at the outset, as they always were—eventually dispense with competitive elections and legal norms.
It is by no means obvious to me, however, which interpretation of the Israeli reality will appear, 10 years hence, to have been closer to the truth.
Scott McConnell is a founding editor of The American Conservative.

Stavros
11-10-2013, 06:11 PM
Blumenthal's book is one in a long line of books by Jews -Israeli or other- which present a stinging critique of the country. There are a long list of such books, for example, after 1948 Alfred Lilienthal began a sustained critique of Zionism with There Goes the Middle East (1957). In the post-1967 era one of the first was by Maxim Ghilan, How Israel Lost its Soul (1972), followed by a two-volume study again by Lilienthal The Zionist Connection (1978 and 1982); then Nathan Weinstock's Zionism: False Messiah (1979) and by Stephen Green Taking Sides: America's Relations with a Militant Israel (1987).
Some of these (Ghilan, and Weinstock for example) are written from a Marxian left perspective, others less so, and form part of a large literature.

The more scholarly camp has in the last 30 years created an intellectual 'war' in which the 'revisionist' historians have attempted to re-write the history of Israel with the romance of the 'war of liberation' replaced by the concept of the 'iron wall' while the pro-Israeli critics do all they can to rubbish the revisionist historians. Two examples can suffice: Efraim Karsh attacking Shlaim, Pappe and the rest (Benny Morris who was a leading figure in the revisionist historiography seems to have decamped to the nationalist cause), and Avi Shlaim writing against the critics (without taking on Karsh).

Karsh:
http://www.meforum.org/302/rewriting-israels-history

Shlaim:
http://users.ox.ac.uk/~ssfc0005%20/The%20War%20of%20the%20Israeli%20Historians.html

A completely different way of looking at this is to understand that within nationalism there is always a tendency toward fascism, though it does not mean every nationalist is a fascist. The emergence of nationalism as a solution to the problem of imperialism in the 19th century, grew in importance after the Napoleonic wars, with Louis Kossuth and the Hungarian national movement being an early example. The problem with the nationalism that replaces imperialism begins when the geography the language and the religion are used to ask the question: do you belong here? Or, are you one of us? It also breeds a mono-cultural view of the new state through an intense fear of outsiders determined, of course, to dilute and erode the basis of the 'nation'. All this in an age of globalisation when no 'nation' has 'sovereignty' over its own economy and when most societies are and have been multi-cultural for centuries. Perhaps also nationalism of the worst sort creates social divisions that lead to violence. Worth looking at the history of Serbia from 1903 (with the bloody overthrow of the Obrenovic dynasty) in particular to 1914 to get a grip on the nationalism which lay at the root of the War and which was not resolved after it with the creation of Yugoslavia and which may in a sense still be awaiting its denouement. I doubt most Israeli's can be pigeon-holed into the compartments required to classify Israel as a fascist state, even if some of its politicians are inheritors of men like Jabotinksy and particularly Avraham Stern who was an admirer of all things Italian, not least Mussolini. Israel after all is as complex as every other state; unfortunately or not, the best minds in Israel go into the arts, sciences and business rather than politics, which thrives on a system of proportional representation that gives power to small parties of nutcases who rarely get more than 5% or 10% of the vote.

Odelay
11-13-2013, 01:51 AM
The thing is, Israel used to elect left to centrist leaders. These days Bibi is what passes as a centrist because there's a whole lot of jackals to the right of him. It's just a long steady drift to the right with no end in sight. It's like Rabin was assassinated and Israelis threw up their hands and said, never again. Admittedly, I don't follow Israeli politics all that closely but I sure don't hear much from the intellectuals anymore. It takes Sid Blumenthal's thoroughly American kid to shake things up.

Stavros
11-13-2013, 10:45 AM
I don't think Blumenthal's book will have much impact on Israel and anyway is targeted at an American readership. What tends to happen with these books is that they generate comment in the pages of newspapers and journals in the US maybe the UK, yet never reach the levels of bitterness and aggression that you find in Israel itself.

Benedict1991
01-05-2014, 10:07 AM
Not surprising given the religion of the majority there. It's one supremacist fascist state running up along several supremacist states in the region.

Prospero
01-05-2014, 10:11 AM
For an intriguing and accessible look at the history of Israel - albeit a depressing one - a documentary called "The Gatekeepers" is well worth watching. it features interviews with the former heads of the Shin Bet. And from the very core of the Israeli state presents a vivid look at the move away from the early idealism of Israel to its complex present day status.

Benedict1991
01-05-2014, 11:10 AM
For an intriguing and accessible look at the history of Israel - albeit a depressing one - a documentary called "The Gatekeepers" is well worth watching. it features interviews with the former heads of the Shin Bet. And from the very core of the Israeli state presents a vivid look at the move away from the early idealism of Israel to its complex present day status.

I think even some of the Shin Bet heads admit "early idealism" is not sustainable, maybe not because of the idealists, but because presence of everyone else.

Also, the early days, lots of very cruel and far-sighted land grabs done to Muslims and Christians to get their land. Irgun was early terrorism too.

Prospero
01-05-2014, 12:33 PM
The labelling of Israel as "a supremecist fascist state" is hugely simplistic and wrong.

Stavros
01-05-2014, 01:54 PM
Not surprising given the religion of the majority there. It's one supremacist fascist state running up along several supremacist states in the region.

Just as people can't tell the difference between the (mostly violent) political ideologies of so-called Islamic 'purists' and Islam as a religion, so it seems you can't tell the difference between Judaism and the politics of Israel -if as you say it is the religion then German Jews would also have been fascist in the 1930s, which is manifest absurdity. Not all nationalists are fascists. Most Israeli Prime Ministers, if all not all of them have been atheists anyway -what is religious about that? If you work through the historical arguments Israelis have with themselves about how their state was formed, and how it has performed since 1948 you will maybe understand how it is politics rather than religion that has shaped the contemporary state.

Prospero
01-05-2014, 02:18 PM
Well put Stavros

Benedict1991
01-05-2014, 07:07 PM
Just as people can't tell the difference between the (mostly violent) political ideologies of so-called Islamic 'purists' and Islam as a religion, so it seems you can't tell the difference between Judaism and the politics of Israel -if as you say it is the religion then German Jews would also have been fascist in the 1930s, which is manifest absurdity. Not all nationalists are fascists. Most Israeli Prime Ministers, if all not all of them have been atheists anyway -what is religious about that? If you work through the historical arguments Israelis have with themselves about how their state was formed, and how it has performed since 1948 you will maybe understand how it is politics rather than religion that has shaped the contemporary state.

No, they wouldn't. Because the fascism that ruled then was European ethnic nationalism, and to the Germans, Spanish, Italians, etc. those Jews were not ethnic Germans/Spanish/Italian etc. not even European.

Prospero
01-05-2014, 07:18 PM
Israel is a democracy. The only one of any functioning note in the Middle east. It's present dominant ideology may well be distasteful. But it is NOT a fascist state. Look up fascism Benedict. It's a word far too easily thrown around. Zionism and Fascism are not synonyms.

Benedict1991
01-05-2014, 08:24 PM
Israel is a democracy. The only one of any functioning note in the Middle east. It's present dominant ideology may well be distasteful. But it is NOT a fascist state. Look up fascism Benedict. It's a word far too easily thrown around. Zionism and Fascism are not synonyms.

You left out EVOLVING fascist state. You cannot set up an argument I did not make in order to save Israel's bacon.

The ethno-religious grounds are already set in Judaism to allow for horrors against those outside the tribe, the demographics are pushing it past South African Apartheid state (which Israel had cozy relations with for decades) and towards fascist state.

Neftali Bennet and Israel home party have fascist leanings, as much as any European party labeled neo-fascist.

broncofan
01-05-2014, 09:29 PM
Benedict,
there is not much to argue with since you only make conclusory claims. There have been people on this site who have said things about Muslims that are a thousand times worse than what you are saying about Judaism and Jewish people. I did try to argue with them as did many decent people, but I suppose I can't be too bent out of shape since you only have 22 posts, and this is afterall the internet. I am Jewish, and as Stavros has said a lot of people in Israel are not observant or particularly religious.

I frequently hear people who say that an attack on Israel is not an attack on Jewish people. However, with you this is a moot point since the basis of your criticism of Israel is its Jewish character.

I will note that even the phrase evolving fascist state is not semantically correct, since what you are trying to say is that it is evolving into a fascist state and what the phrase actually says is that they are already fascist and continuing to morph (into what I don't know).

broncofan
01-05-2014, 09:40 PM
Neftali Bennet and Israel home party have fascist leanings, as much as any European party labeled neo-fascist.
But would it be acceptable to call Hungary a fascist state because of the presence of Jobbik as a minority party in their political system?

The reason the phrase evolving fascist state is being used is so that you can divorce yourself entirely from the definition of fascism. They have not reached that point but you say they are on their way so you do not have to make any argument that is empirically correct. Then you can make a few vague allusions to Judaism, supremacism, and apartheid.

Most Jewish people do not mind reasoned discussion of the many faults of the government in Israel. I don't mind. It is the intentional use of overblown language, intentionally divorced from actual meaning, that sounds quite a bit like demonization.

And before you say that you knew you would be called anti-semitic for what you said, let me say that I knew you would say you knew you would be called anti-semitic. You cannot pre-empt someone who has seen your shit a thousand times before.

Benedict1991
01-05-2014, 09:42 PM
Benedict,
there is not much to argue with since you only make conclusory claims. There have been people on this site who have said things about Muslims that are a thousand times worse than what you are saying about Judaism and Jewish people. I did try to argue with them as did many decent people, but I suppose I can't be too bent out of shape since you only have 22 posts, and this is afterall the internet. I am Jewish, and as Stavros has said a lot of people in Israel are not observant or particularly religious.

I frequently hear people who say that an attack on Israel is not an attack on Jewish people. However, with you this is a moot point since the basis of your criticism of Israel is its Jewish character.

I will note that even the phrase evolving fascist state is not semantically correct, since what you are trying to say is that it is evolving into a fascist state and what the phrase actually says is that they are already fascist and continuing to morph (into what I don't know).

You don't have to be observant, only in your heart if you believe that non-Jew are animal or not born with the same level of soul, then you can do just about anything.

Don't forget, it's not the first time Jews have massacred or done horrible acts to non-Jews in that area. Jewish Home Party would not be as observant as super Haredi Jews, but JHP is ready to kill non-Jews and is headed by former commando, while Haredi Jews protest even a young man in their ranks drafted into combat units.


So level of observance isn't as important as tribal-supremacist feeling…which is supported through Judaism itself. That is essentially what Judaism was for many centuries. The reform and secular humanist Jews can't even control the government, let alone get a majority of the Jews in the country.

Also, it's interesting that it is allowed to say most things about other groups, but Jews? No. A Jew can mock other groups, or offer strongly negative critique, but to say a bad thing about Judaism? Then you must be censored and ostracized. No one can speak ill of the chosen people, eh?

Prospero
01-05-2014, 09:43 PM
Anti-zionism is often a mask for anti-semitism. Which is what I discern in Benedict's postings.

The presence of extreme right wingers does not mean a nation is evolving into a fascist state.

Don't know where he hails from but it is worthy also pointing out that the US and UK among others also had "cosy" relations with South Africa.

Benedict1991
01-05-2014, 09:44 PM
But would it be acceptable to call Hungary a fascist state because of the presence of Jobbik as a minority party in their political system?

The reason the phrase evolving fascist state is being used is so that you can divorce yourself entirely from the definition of fascism. They have not reached that point but you say they are on their way so you do not have to make any argument that is empirically correct. Then you can make a few vague allusions to Judaism, supremacism, and apartheid.

Most Jewish people do not mind reasoned discussion of the many faults of the government in Israel. I don't mind. It is the intentional use of overblown language, intentionally divorced from actual meaning, that sounds quite a bit like demonization.

And before you say that you knew you would be called anti-semitic for what you said, let me say that I knew you would say you knew you would be called anti-semitic. You cannot pre-empt someone who has seen your shit a thousand times before.

That's why the idea was evolving fascist state. Israel is much farther down that road than Hungary, but both or neither could eventually become a fascist state.

Prospero
01-05-2014, 09:45 PM
A post since I composed this from Benedict who, in getting riled up, is beginning to show his true colours.... morphing into.... evolving into.... lol

Prospero
01-05-2014, 09:46 PM
And where do you, benedict, get the notion that Jews see others as animals or not born with the "same level of soul." Quote your sources please ...

Benedict1991
01-05-2014, 09:47 PM
Anti-zionism is often a mask for anti-semitism. Which is what I discern in Benedict's postings.

The presence of extreme right wingers does not mean a nation is evolving into a fascist state.

Don't know where he hails from but it is worthy also pointing out that the US and UK among others also had "cosy" relations with South Africa.

Did I say that was the "slam dunk" no of course not. It's just one of many pieces.

I think it's very funny that supposed defenders of human rights suddenly have cold feet when it comes to criticizing little Israel. It just would not be polite to offer the same critique as to other nations. Some nations are more equal than others.

Prospero
01-05-2014, 09:49 PM
Arrant nonsense... criticism of Israel is fine, but get your facts right .... but then it is Jews you are criticising so that is okay.

Prospero
01-05-2014, 09:53 PM
Sources benedict.... you are making some very serious and anti-semitic claims

Benedict1991
01-05-2014, 09:57 PM
And where do you, benedict, get the notion that Jews see others as animals or not born with the "same level of soul." Quote your sources please ...

http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/1.566021
http://www.nrg.co.il/online/1/ART2/534/750.html?hp=1&cat=404&loc=1
This man has passed on.
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Security-Watch/Backchannels/2013/1007/Rabbi-Ovadia-Yosef-in-his-own-words
Important settler rabbi.
http://www.ynetnews.com/Ext/Comp/ArticleLayout/CdaArticlePrintPreview/1,2506,L-4006385,00.html

broncofan
01-05-2014, 10:01 PM
You don't have to be observant, only in your heart if you believe that non-Jew are animal or not born with the same level of soul, then you can do just about anything.
Then you must be censored and ostracized. No one can speak ill of the chosen people, eh?
It is nearly an intrinsic aspect of religion that you believe you have a near monopoly on what is right. I have been surrounded by Jewish people my entire life and have never heard another Jew refer to a non-Jew as an animal. Only one time in my life have I heard a Jew refer to a non-Jew as a goy, and it was my cousin making a joke behind someone's back and I told her I thought what she said was highly inappropriate.

When you say "chosen people" you are doing what many anti-semites do when they imply that this means Jewish people think they are superior. I have heard it stated repeatedly by every Jewish organization who has weighed in on the issue that this means Jewish people are "burdened" to follow certain practices and are not privileged. In fact, this has been the interpretation for hundreds of years.

Let me point out that when I criticize Christianity, I try to put it in the context of my criticism of religion in general. And that is that theoretically, if you feel you need to follow a doctrine written thousands of years ago purporting to be the word of God, it is difficult to decide when it is acceptable to depart from it. It is fairly easy to tell the difference between a criticism of the core practices of members of a religion and attempts to malign members of one specific religion by singling it out and accusing its members of devaluing all other human life.

Anyhow, the original post was based on an article in a major periodical. Though I don't agree with the argument, the article was based on a book written by Max Blumenthal and tried to advance its argument without resort to gratuitous abuse. There are ways to discuss these issues if you do not have an axe to grind that are not so crude and transparent.

Benedict1991
01-05-2014, 10:03 PM
But would it be acceptable to call Hungary a fascist state because of the presence of Jobbik as a minority party in their political system?

The reason the phrase evolving fascist state is being used is so that you can divorce yourself entirely from the definition of fascism. They have not reached that point but you say they are on their way so you do not have to make any argument that is empirically correct. Then you can make a few vague allusions to Judaism, supremacism, and apartheid.

Most Jewish people do not mind reasoned discussion of the many faults of the government in Israel. I don't mind. It is the intentional use of overblown language, intentionally divorced from actual meaning, that sounds quite a bit like demonization.

And before you say that you knew you would be called anti-semitic for what you said, let me say that I knew you would say you knew you would be called anti-semitic. You cannot pre-empt someone who has seen your shit a thousand times before.

I would also have you know the use of evolving is due to the title and the man wondering if Israel is evolving into a fascist state is a Jew himself of an illustrious lineage. There is a fork where humanist Judaism has changed and evolved away from traditional or orthodox Judaism. This debate on what is authentic Judaism has been going on for hundreds of years, now that Israel exists, this contest will be played out more and more.

broncofan
01-05-2014, 10:08 PM
http://www.haaretz.com/news/national/1.566021
http://www.nrg.co.il/online/1/ART2/534/750.html?hp=1&cat=404&loc=1
This man has passed on.
http://www.csmonitor.com/World/Security-Watch/Backchannels/2013/1007/Rabbi-Ovadia-Yosef-in-his-own-words
Important settler rabbi.
http://www.ynetnews.com/Ext/Comp/ArticleLayout/CdaArticlePrintPreview/1,2506,L-4006385,00.html
If you can take the statements of individual Jews and use them to represent core beliefs of Jewish people, you can literally make any argument you want. Could I quote an individual imam to make the argument that all Muslims dislike Jews? Or how about an individual Christian to claim that all Christians want to go on a crusade against Muslims?

Even the sources you list have a subtext that you ignore, which is that the comments made are controversial and appalling. Since you didn't bother to read any of the articles you link, let me just quote for you:

"His conservative stance negated a ruling widely accepted by rabbis, which states that sperm donated by a non-Jew is preferable to that of an anonymous Jew, who might pose a genealogical risk."

The widely accepted view of these Rabbis is that they would prefer "animal" sperm to be injected into women rather than that of Jews whose identity is unknown. Sort of contradicts the point you are trying to make.

Prospero
01-05-2014, 10:13 PM
One of those links was in Hebrew. You read Hebrew? As for the others - well a handful of extremist religious bigots is not representative of Judaism as a whole, any more than al-Queda represents the politics of mass of Moslems or the Taliban the religious beliefs of islam or the ludicrous fanatics of the Christian right represent Christianity.

broncofan
01-05-2014, 10:16 PM
I would also have you know the use of evolving is due to the title and the man wondering if Israel is evolving into a fascist state is a Jew himself of an illustrious lineage.
You didn't think I knew that someone named Blumenthal writing about Israel is also Jewish? In fact, the fact that he's Jewish probably makes people use what he says more liberally than if he were not.

I have a hypothetical for you. Two Jews. One says that Israel is an evolving fascist state. The other says that Israel is not an evolving fascist state. Who do you quote? Well, naturally, any Jewish person making a statement about anything related to Jewish interests must be believed, so how do you mediate this?

In law there is a certain type of hearsay that is admissible because it has indicia of correctness. An admission against a party opponent is thought to be likely to be reliable because who would say something incriminating about themselves unless it were true?

You are taking this rule of thumb to an impractical limit by inferring that any Jewish person saying anything against an ethnic interest must be believed. Bottom line: It doesn't make Max Blumenthal's argument more compelling that he is Jewish. The only reason I stated that I am Jewish was to give you some context for my offense at your comments.

Benedict1991
01-05-2014, 10:16 PM
One of those links was in Hebrew. You read Hebrew? As for the others - well a handful of extremist religious bigots is not representative of Judaism as a whole, any more than al-Queda represents the politics of mass of Moslems or the Taliban the religious beliefs of islam or the ludicrous fanatics of the Christian right represent Christianity.

If you had stopped to read the articles before commenting, you would see that I just supplied the source that the other was commenting on, unless you consider a legitimate Israeli news site antisemitic too.

Is that the way you operate huh? Not reading any links and going into full spin mode immediately? Maybe it's best just to block you or ignore you, I don't want to waste time on a spin artist.

Prospero
01-05-2014, 10:18 PM
Well I am not Jewish and I take offence at Benedict's remarks. Taking a few extremists and tarring a whole people or nation. Pretty slim evidence though not untypical of the "anti zionists"

Benedict1991
01-05-2014, 10:20 PM
You didn't think I knew that someone named Blumenthal writing about Israel is also Jewish? In fact, the fact that he's Jewish probably makes people use what he says more liberally than if he were not.

I have a hypothetical for you. Two Jews. One says that Israel is an evolving fascist state. The other says that Israel is not an evolving fascist state. Who do you quote? Well, naturally, any Jewish person making a statement about anything related to Jewish interests must be believed, so how do you mediate this?

In law there is a certain type of hearsay that is admissible because it has indicia of correctness. An admission against a party opponent is thought to be likely to be reliable because who would say something incriminating about themselves unless it were true?

You are taking this rule of thumb to an impractical limit by inferring that any Jewish person saying anything against an ethnic interest must be believed. Bottom line: It doesn't make Max Blumenthal's argument more compelling that he is Jewish. The only reason I stated that I am Jewish was to give you some context for my offense at your comments.

So if a Christian or a Muslim is particularly offended by something negative about their respective religions means what? You think you get special treatment?


You were crying about a certain level of harshness and the use of "evolving" to say that it needs to be discounted because it may or may not be empirically provable. What is the point of writing an opinion piece at all? Then there would be very little one could write in the realm of international relations and security because a lot of if hinges on what MAY happen if certain conditions continue or change, rather than what IS happening under static conditions.

Benedict1991
01-05-2014, 10:23 PM
and dear Benedict more of your neo-racist spewings and you'll find yourself rather more significantly blocked, old fella

I don't mind if you block me, I would rather not converse with a guy who thinks it's okay for one group to be supremacist. Especially when the same guy claims to be against racism and supremacism in other nations and ethnicities.

Please block me from reading my posts. I'll gladly ignore you too. In fact, I'll start right now!

broncofan
01-05-2014, 10:24 PM
If you had stopped to read the articles before commenting, you would see that I just supplied the source that the other was commenting on, unless you consider a legitimate Israeli news site antisemitic too.

.
What the articles say is different from the conclusions you draw from them. You have said that Jewish people believe non-Jews are animals. How is it that I have met thousands of Jews, had intimate conversations with many of them, spent more than a dozen years in a synagogue and never heard this? This must be an aberrant view of extremists and not something a significant number of Jews believe.

Of course you are anti-semitic. This thread has been here for weeks and nobody implied that any of the posters are anti-semitic until you came on here making claims about "chosen people" and Jews believing non-Jews are sub-human.

broncofan
01-05-2014, 10:33 PM
Then there would be very little one could write in the realm of international relations and security because a lot of if hinges on what MAY happen if certain conditions continue or change, rather than what IS happening under static conditions.
I've rebutted every serious attempt at an argument you've made. A lot hinges on what may happen. But do you know what they call it when people speculate about the future? Prediction. Prognostication. You can make this same argument about any nation if you are not bound by description and can instead indict people and nations for what may come to pass.

If a Muslim or Christian feels members of their religion are being demonized by a bigot, and they express their objections, I think most would tend to empathize with them. There was a thread a while back where a moron like yourself was expressing vitriol towards Muslims and nobody agreed with him. What you have said about Jewish people is not mere criticism, it consists of hyperbolic lies.

broncofan
01-05-2014, 10:39 PM
I don't mind if you block me, I would rather not converse with a guy who thinks it's okay for one group to be supremacist.
Did he say it was okay for one group to be supremacist? No. He said he disagreed with your conclusion that Jewish people are supremacist. Why is it that you are not able to make a single honest statement?

Stavros
01-06-2014, 04:02 AM
Did I say that was the "slam dunk" no of course not. It's just one of many pieces.

I think it's very funny that supposed defenders of human rights suddenly have cold feet when it comes to criticizing little Israel. It just would not be polite to offer the same critique as to other nations. Some nations are more equal than others.

And yet as I have pointed out in other posts some of the most tenacious, indeed vicious critics of Israel have been Israelis. If you have read the literature you will know that the Labour party dominated Israel from 1948 to the elections in 1977, that the British Labour Party supported it because it was a fellow member of the Socialist international and there was a view that Israel in its early days was -dare I say it- an 'evolving' socialist state -ever heard of a Kibbutz? The concept of Moshav? Yes, the governments of Israel since 1977 have for the most part had their roots in the anti-Socialist revisionist movements of Jabotinsky, and yes Avraham Stern was an admirer of Mussolini -all that tells you is that it is possible to be a Jew and be a socialist, a fascist, a liberal, a nationalist, a serial killer, an entrepreneur -heavens, just like everyone else. The singularity you are searching for in 'Jewish' society doesn't exist, not in Israel, not in the USA or anywhere else.

And yes it is perfectly right to criticise the Netanyahu government for its policies toward the Bedouin of the Negev, West Bank settlements, hypocrisy on nuclear weapon in Iran, and so on. But you can't dismiss the entire country and it is not written in stone that Israel will forever be ruled by extremists. Israel doesn't have the political leaders it deserves, because the best minds in Israel don't go into politics but business, science, the arts -we are suffering in the UK from a paucity of intelligence in our own politicians, it is hardly unique to Israel.

Stavros
01-06-2014, 04:07 AM
Israel is a democracy. The only one of any functioning note in the Middle east. It's present dominant ideology may well be distasteful. But it is NOT a fascist state. Look up fascism Benedict. It's a word far too easily thrown around. Zionism and Fascism are not synonyms.

There are democratically elected governments in Jordan, Lebanon, Iraq and Turkey if you class the latter as a Middle Eastern state; no more perfect or imperfect than Israel where a party can become part of the government with less than 10% of the vote on a low turnout. There is nothing democratic at all about Israel's occupation of the West Bank.

Prospero
01-06-2014, 07:50 AM
I stand corrected. Thanks Stavros - though I would exclude Turkey.

However I don't think democratic is a word that is relevant to the occupation. I see where you're coming from though.

Stavros
01-06-2014, 12:30 PM
I should also have included Iran. Not sure what your query is on democracy on the West Bank which as far as the current Israeli government is concerned is part of Israel which means there is no occupation. If it isn't occupied but part of Israel then Israel's democracy should apply to the whole area; it doesn't.

Prospero
01-06-2014, 01:07 PM
Iran's so-called democracy is just that....

Stavros
01-06-2014, 10:43 PM
Nevertheless, Rouhani was not the preferred candidate of the Supreme Guardian Council, so how come they didn't fix it for their guy to win?

Dino Velvet
01-06-2014, 11:03 PM
Nevertheless, Rouhani was not the preferred candidate of the Supreme Guardian Council, so how come they didn't fix it for their guy to win?

I'm a little submissive who has to rely on those media people and was convinced the fix was in thinking Saeed Jalili would win. Glad the news here was as full of horse manure as usual. Seems like the Iranian President is a more of a figurehead and they could do way worse than Rouhani. At least the isolation is thawing.

broncofan
01-07-2014, 12:04 AM
Nevertheless, Rouhani was not the preferred candidate of the Supreme Guardian Council, so how come they didn't fix it for their guy to win?
If one is cynical enough they can always think of a reason. For instance, maybe they thought there was too much scrutiny this time around to fix the election. I wouldn't make an argument like that, but somebody could always mine for such a reason.

Maybe Prospero was talking about how the Supreme leader of Iran is not elected but his post is created by their constitution. Looking at the Supreme Leader's duties and putting aside his religious function, it seems he has a lot of the same responsibilities as the executive in the United States. He appoints heads of major departments, appoints individuals to judiciary, and command of the armed forces. I know very little about Iran's government and am just going by what I read on wikipedia this instant. But if the Supreme Leader is not accountable by election, he can act with impunity given that he controls the military, appoints the judiciary, heads of intelligence and counter-intelligence agencies.

broncofan
01-07-2014, 12:07 AM
I am not saying that makes Iran entirely authoritarian either. There are restraints on what the Supreme Leader can do vis a vis initiating impeachment of the President and other executive functions. I am just saying it is not traditional for an un-elected official to wield at least some of the power he has been granted.

Stavros
01-07-2014, 04:14 AM
I am not saying that makes Iran entirely authoritarian either. There are restraints on what the Supreme Leader can do vis a vis initiating impeachment of the President and other executive functions. I am just saying it is not traditional for an un-elected official to wield at least some of the power he has been granted.

I think the turning point in Iran, or one of them, will come when they no longer need a 'Supreme Leader' to maintain the legacy of Khomeini. At the moment that looks no more likely than the Chinese removing Mao's portrait from the entrance to the Forbidden City. Lebanon's democracy must be one of the oddest in the world as it guarantees offices of state to specific confession, and means the President will always be a Christian and the Prime Minister a 'Sunni' Muslim. A Lebanese Christian with political ambitions will never be Foreign Secretary, and so on. Just as seats in Parliament are guaranteed to representatives of different religious groups, so in Jordan seats in Parliament are reserved for the Bedouin while 'sons of the country' dominate the armed forces and the upper echelons of the civil service. Yet neither Jordan nor Lebanon are as bad as Saddam Hussein's Iraq, to take one example. Iran has the same vein of central command as other Middle Eastern states, I think the overall picture is relative and anyway even free elections are only one part of democratic life. Civil society, that network of activities autonomous from the state is lacking in the region as a whole, and as a result the state becomes a presence in people's lives to an extent we would find intolerable in the west and which many have in the Middle East.

In the meantime, burger joints are all the rage in Tehran, from blatant rip-off's of Five Guys, to McAli's...Iranians love a tasty burger...
http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/nothing-quite-like-a-mcalis-burger-irans-foodies-opt-for-taste-of-america-with-a-glut-of-highend-grill-restaurants-in-tehran-9042445.html

http://www.washingtonpost.com/rf/image_606w/2010-2019/WashingtonPost/2013/12/29/Foreign/Images/IRAN%200011388344991.jpg