Monday, July 01, 2013

The color fascist

Very few people would consider Alice Walker, author of The Color Purple, to be worthy of assassination. Yet conservative Jewish voices have, in fact, called for her murder because she feels that Israel's indefensible treatment of the Palestinians mandates a boycott of that nation.

One of the charges against Walker is that she has (allegedly) equated Israel's genocidal policies with those of the Third Reich.Yet her critics express themselves in a fashion indistinguishable from the hate-mongering of Julius Streicher:
For having the temerity to step outside of the invisible plantation in which a patronizing Jewish establishment has long consigned the black intelligentsia and political class, Walker is being subjected to a level of racist venom that one might expect from a KKK journal.

When one of Algemeiner’s commenters, Eric R., calls for “Mossad to deal with her” and another commenter, Boston University history professor, Richard Landes, replies that “this is a stupid comment and should have been moderated out,” Eric R. writes back to justify his virtual call for her to be eliminated, Mossad style:

“Tell me, Professor Landes, why you are against Israel dealing with her and other Nazis in this manner? Don’t just give me a reflexive ‘How awful! We can’t say that!’ How else are you going to stop such hatred coming from such sick, hate-filled scum like Walker, who is basically inciting people to genocide? Persuade them? This woman is deranged by her hate, and can no longer be reasoned with. People like her who support and incite people to murder Jews are just as bad as the suicide bombers themselves….

“Israel is dealing with two genocidal groups that increasingly dominate the world – Marxists and Islamists. Playing nice will no longer work with such brutal totalitarian ideologies. To survive, Israel will have to play some very brutal hard ball. That is just a fact of life in an increasingly intolerant, anti-Semitic and totalitarian world. Trying to silence me does not change that.”
Translation: "We Jews are allowed to do anything we want -- anything at all, up to and including the murder of a peaceful and law-abiding writer. And if you protest, we will call you an anti-Semite."

(The world is dominated by "Marxists"? Sheesh. I doubt that Marxists dominate even one of the coffee houses outside the entrance to the University of California at Berkeley.)

I know that many Jews, both within and outside Israel, do not share this Nazi-fied mentality. Many Jews understand that race-based hatred and ethnic supremacism will inevitably prove self-destructive. But few understand that there is one fundamental way in which Israel is actually worse than Hitler's Germany.

The Germans had a right to live on German land. They did not have a right to invade other lands, and they did not have a right to persecute minority populations. But the Germans had a right to live in Germany.

No Jew ever had a right to set foot in the land now called Israel -- not Ben-Gurion, not Jesus, not Saul, not Solomon. This fact of history is clearly indicated by the Jewish scriptures themselves -- the books of Joshua and Judges and the Pentateuch, which unashamedly state that the Jews took the land through an inexcusable campaign of terror and genocide. (The scriptures also state that they used their barbaric tribal military deity, Yahu, as their ultimate fall-god: "We had no choice but to kill all those people. Yahu told us to do it.")

Of course, scholars debate the historicity of these ancient texts. If those accounts are accurate, then the state was rotten in its very origins. If those accounts are mythical, then the foundation myth of that state is what I call a "psychotoxic text." (That's my term for any text designed to drive its readers mad. Algemeiner, quoted above, seems to be a psychotoxic periodical.)

Of course, I am always quick to note that my own nation was founded on the toxic myth of manifest destiny. The resultant genocide of the Native Americans was no myth. Although historical parallels are never exact, this particular historical parallel is pretty damned close to exact: What the Israelis have done -- are doing -- to the Palestinians (the rightful owners of that land) recapitulates what white Americans did to the Chumash (the rightful owners of my boyhood home) and the Piscataways (the rightful owners of the place where I now reside).

So, yes -- one may fairly argue that Americans and Israelis are alike in original sin. But that resemblance hardly justifies Israel's continued existence as a "Jewish nation." That entire concept is racist. Moreover, I would wager most Americans, both Jewish and gentile, secretly know that the idea of a "Jewish nation" is racist, although few will allow themselves to speak those words aloud.

I once favored a two-state solution. Now, the only fair outcome seems to be a single state in which the vote extends to all persons living under the rule of that government -- and in which the Palestinians now bottled up in Gaza and other concentration camps have the right of return. Those Jews in Israel who can accept life within a true, non-racist democracy -- one which seeks to rectify historical injustices against the Palestinians -- should be treated with perfect equality and fairness. Those Jews who remain too arrogant and bigoted to live alongside non-Jews must leave. Decent people should not care one jot if the insular and the insolent have no home.

The Holocaust does not justify the Nakba.
Comments:
I wonder if this two-state solution has any practical prospect: a secular, democratic state alongside a symbolic Jewish state on the order of a Vatican City that can issue its own passports, postage stamps and money.

For Israelis unwilling to live in a secular state I suggest establishing a tribal reservation on US public land--which is what should have been done in the first place instead of giving them Palestine.

Funds presently allocated to the defense of Israel could be repurposed to the development and support of these reservations.
 
Agreed again. I love your arguments and writing of late. I feel like I've come back home.

As a former liberal who's independent now, with a touch of the dreaded libertarianism, you are making my heart sing.
Kitty
 
My compliments on your bravery on raising this subject. The hasbara are likely to make the former CD posters seem timid and polite by contrast.

My first response was to agree completely with this post. Then I realized I am sympathetic to the national aspirations of the Kurds, the Basques, the Timorese, etc., thinking them fine in concept, if impractically too violent likely in practice. The minority Moslems in India got their separate country, Pakistan.

Similarly, I'd always previously thought a national homeland for Jews was not offensive on its face, and rather benign in concept. So I was a Zionist in effect, agreeing with that national project in principle.

Now Zionism means something far broader than that bare idea, and I do oppose it, while struggling to understand why the IDEA is different from other groups' national aspirations, which I continue to endorse.

Surely a Kurdish nation might exclude others, or discriminate against other non-Kurds who continued to live there, an outcome I shrug off as the way of the world.

XI


 
Let me see if I can pull your chestnuts from the fire, Joseph.

Zionism is not Judaism.

'Nuff said...

Ben
 
This last two posts are simply beyond the pale. To cite the neo-nazi and holocaust denying website Global Research shows precisely where your sympathies lie. Furthermore the discussion of Israel is simply divorced from reality and shows a stunning predisposition to believe every lie told about Israel. And to posit that the Roman Catholic church is the true victim of hate is just bizarre.
 
Dood I was trying to help. I think it's important to make the distinction, that's all. Really. What's the fucking problem? Time out.

Ben
 
YOU are beyond the pale, you arrogant Jewish supremacist.

Of course the Catholic Church is the true victim of hate. That has been the case in this country since the advent of the Know-Nothings, and in Britain since the days of Henry VIII. Look at the absurd portrait of Church that comes at us repeatedly in BBC or American programming like "Da Vinci's Demons" or Brad Meltzer's Decoded show. (I'm thinking of the Vatican episode, which contained one inanity after another.) Compare those hate-fests to the way Jews are portrayed in Third Reich propaganda films such as "The Eternal Jew." The Nazis, awful as they were, were SUBTLE compared to the religious hate-mongering we get routinely on cable teevee.

Modern Jews, especially in Israel, are not the victims of anything. Quite the contrary: If anyone BUT Jews ran Israel, the entire world would have risen up and blasted that criminal, genocidal government to smithereens decades ago.

Americans are waking up. We are no longer allowing ourselves to be cowed into silence when people like you say "We can kill anyone we want! We can steal all the land we want! And if you say otherwise, you're a big bad anti-Semite!"

Sooner than you think, the racists of Israel will be forced to confront a stark choice: Either live in EQUALITY with your Palestinian victims -- or go. No matter how smart the Israelis think they are, they aren't smart enough to put off that day of reckoning forever. I may not believe in Yahu, the barbaric war-god of the ancient Jews, but I do believe (at least some of the time) in karma. The Zionists racked up one hell of a lot of bad karma when they committed the Nakba against an entirely innocent people.

THE HOLOCAUST DOES NOT JUSTIFY THE NAKBA.

I will grant but one point: I should never have linked to anything written by Chussudovsky. To be honest, I momentarily forgot who he is. As you know, I certainly have no sympathy with any 9/11 nutcase of his ilk. Now that you've reminded who he is, I will remove the citation.

But that one citation doesn't matter, since the same point about al-Nusra is made by plenty of other sources. If you'll notice, I also cited a long post on the very same topic that had appeared earlier in this blog, and to which you registered no objection at the time.
 
Ben, you were confused. There are two Josephs here. The pro-Israeli commenter uses the lower case j. I use an upper-case J.
 
Post a Comment

<< Home


This page is 

powered by Blogger. 

Isn't yours?






























FeedWind












FeedWind