Anti-Zionism

[SerjeantWildgoose]

http://www.france24.com/en/20170717-fra ... -holocaust

So, is Macron right? Is anti-Zionism merely anti-Semitism reinvented?

Here I have to warn anyone who may be tempted to contribute to this thread that the UK has formally adopted a definition of anti-Semitism that includes, "Denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor."

I pride myself on taking people as I find them and while I may be a judgemental bastard, I like to think that I judge people on their individual merits (Or more often their signal lack of them), rather than as a collective group (Apart from Glasgow r*gby supporters and Jackeens). But when Macron begins to broaden the definition of anti-Semitism so that it encroaches upon an ill-defined area of what I consider to be legitimate protest, am I in danger of becoming an anti-Semite by default rather than design?

Is it even possible to have a reasoned debate on this issue or have the experiences of Ken Livingstone and Naz Shah (Among others) taught us that even on the fringes, there is no room or reason.

Do the statistics on Palestininan Arab poverty, unemployment and limited access to education not prove that the State of Israel deserves Jimmy Carter's epithet of an apartheid and therefore a racist entity? Are those of us who are critical of illegal Israeli settlements and Israel's wholly disproportionate response to Hamas attacks (both of which are directly linked to Zionism) in danger of having the Prime Minister 'call us out'?

[morepork]

Macron really does seem to be polishing the family silver for his new best friends doesn't he? Is there a vying for leadership and influence in the vacuum created by the bumblings of the Trump administration? If so there is a risk of imposing over zealous and poorly considered "definitions" such as you refer to here, surely.

[OptimisticJock]

I don't understand the fetish of not being able to criticise Israel. No other nation appears to be above it so why them? It comes under the banner of PC gorn mad for me. Nothing, nobody is above criticism.

[Donny osmond]

Its the modern way... someone says something you dont like and you just label them as a bigot in some way instead of debating a point. They're so busy proving they arent bigoted the original point is lost and remains undebated.

On Israel, there's no excuse for their actions toward Palestinians, none. The only reason is to make them leave, at which time Israel will take over the land for Israelis and instantly restore electricity, water, sanitation etc. If objecting to that makes me anti-zionist then I'm proud to be thus labelled, as I know whoever is throwing that label is exposing themselves​ as the real bigot. Which is not to say I necessarily have problem with the existence of the state of israel, just that their policies and actions towards the palestinians makes them a bunch of cnuts.

Macron is just making friends and influencing people, a bit of real politik going on, bit its an ugly point to make.

Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk

[Adder]

Its the modern way... someone says something you dont like and you just label them as a bigot in some way instead of debating a point. They're so busy proving they arent bigoted the original point is lost and remains undebated.

On Israel, there's no excuse for their actions toward Palestinians, none. The only reason is to make them leave, at which time Israel will take over the land for Israelis and instantly restore electricity, water, sanitation etc. If objecting to that makes me anti-zionist then I'm proud to be thus labelled, as I know whoever is throwing that label is exposing themselves​ as the real bigot. Which is not to say I necessarily have problem with the existence of the state of israel, just that their policies and actions towards the palestinians makes them a bunch of cnuts.

Macron is just making friends and influencing people, a bit of real politik going on, bit its an ugly point to make.

Sent from my HUAWEI VNS-L31 using Tapatalk

Agreed, I think Israel is "wonderfully" using the 2 state solution to get away with this crap.

[Zhivago]

It will just lead to being more precise. I'm not against Zionism, just an extremist strand within it that is revisionist, imperialist, and racist. If you trace this Revisionist stand back from Likud to Irgun you get some quite unsavory ideology.

It's right that Israel exists, but so should Palestine. The Balfour declaration originally supported an Israeli state IN Palestine, not in place of Palestine.

[Zhivago]

Among the most disturbing political phenomena of our times is the emergence in the newly created state of Israel of the "Freedom Party" (Tnuat Haherut), a political party closely akin in its organization, methods, political philosophy and social appeal to the Nazi and Fascist parties. It was formed out of the membership and following of the former Irgun Zvai Leumi, a terrorist, right-wing, chauvinist organization in Palestine ... It is inconceivable that those who oppose fascism throughout the world, if correctly informed as to Mr. Begin's political record and perspectives, could add their names and support to the movement he represents ... Today they speak of freedom, democracy and anti-imperialism, whereas until recently they openly preached the doctrine of the Fascist state. It is in its actions that the terrorist party betrays its real character; from its past actions we can judge what it may be expected to do in the future.

(Signed by Einstein, Arendt, and other prominent Jewish intellectuals)

The party mentioned in the letter is the ancestor of the current Likud party that Bibi leads, and which is in control of Israel for some time now.

If people are anti-Zionist, then they are so predominantly because they have been exposed mostly to this toxic version of it that is repulsive in so many ways.

[Zhivago]

Required reading :
https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Causes_ ... ian_exodus

[WaspInWales]

Macron has been busy.

[Lord Lucan]

Who's gonna do something about it? the Arabs tried and had their asses whooped. Its survival of the fittest in this world, the strong will over come the weak, Israel is strong, the Palestinians are weak, they should accept defeat and move to Jordan, most of them live there anyway. That country is too small for the both of them.

[SerjeantWildgoose]

Fuck me; have you been reading your copy of Mein Kampf again?

Israel is strong because the likes of the US and France make it strong. The Palestinians are weak because most of the world chooses to ignore the deliberate and genocidal flaunting of international law that keeps them in a perpetual state of weakness. Palestinians are not, and never have been, Jordanians and those who 'live' there do so as refugees. Israel is not big enough for even one of 'them' which is why Israel is deliberately and illegally expanding its borders by land grab to provide more living room for those who believe that scripture gives them a greater right to the land than those they are forcing off it.

Try and find out something - anything - about a debate before you pour your worthless bile into the pot, ye pointless wank-stain.

[Lord Lucan]

Fuck me; have you been reading your copy of Mein Kampf again?

Israel is strong because the likes of the US and France make it strong. The Palestinians are weak because most of the world chooses to ignore the deliberate and genocidal flaunting of international law that keeps them in a perpetual state of weakness. Palestinians are not, and never have been, Jordanians and those who 'live' there do so as refugees. Israel is not big enough for even one of 'them' which is why Israel is deliberately and illegally expanding its borders by land grab to provide more living room for those who believe that scripture gives them a greater right to the land than those they are forcing off it.

Try and find out something - anything - about a debate before you pour your worthless bile into the pot, ye pointless wank-stain.

Hey Rambo try reading the bible, the Jews are Gods people, and Israel is the land he gave them to live in, ye can't argue against that.

[Sandydragon]

The truly annoying thing about this subject is that there has been an increase in anti-Semitism in Europe, partly due to perceptions of Israel's conduct, and it amazes me that people cant disassociate the actions of a country that has a majority Jewish religion to people of that religion who may, or may not, be from that country. Its the same cretinous behaviour that surrounds attacking a Muslim in the UK after 9/11, or 7/7. Some of the recent blood libel examples have no place in a modern democracy, yet they are being stated openly within the UK, i.e. Jews are responsible for the Grenfell Fire.

There are plenty of fair criticisms to level at Israel. I would suggest that Israel is not the only country against whom many of those criticisms can be directed; and if protestors are so keen on universal human rights then they could equally target their ire against some of the other countries. I also suspect that much of the criticism hails as much from Israel being an ally of the US as it does about its religious background.

[morepork]

The truly annoying thing about this subject is that there has been an increase in anti-Semitism in Europe, partly due to perceptions of Israel's conduct, and it amazes me that people cant disassociate the actions of a country that has a majority Jewish religion to people of that religion who may, or may not, be from that country. Its the same cretinous behaviour that surrounds attacking a Muslim in the UK after 9/11, or 7/7. Some of the recent blood libel examples have no place in a modern democracy, yet they are being stated openly within the UK, i.e. Jews are responsible for the Grenfell Fire.

There are plenty of fair criticisms to level at Israel. I would suggest that Israel is not the only country against whom many of those criticisms can be directed; and if protestors are so keen on universal human rights then they could equally target their ire against some of the other countries. I also suspect that much of the criticism hails as much from Israel being an ally of the US as it does about its religious background.

That is not a very glowing endorsement of human rights campaigners. But I expect that was your point. Does your opinion of them detract from legitimate criticism against Israel?

[Sandydragon]

No it doesn't. Legitimate criticism should be made of any country.

Sadly, too much criticism is influenced by propaganda and background agendas - my point about many human rights activists and other campaigners. I don't doubt that there are some, many, protestors who will campaign against Israel, but will also campaign against China, Syria, Russia, etc, etc.

But for many, Israel is the only target for their human rights concerns. I'm not going to accuse them all of anti-Semitism, although I'm sure some are, but I rather suspect that their anger is tied up into the whole anti-American/establishment/capitalism agenda where Israel is a key ally of the USA.

[morepork]

No it doesn't. Legitimate criticism should be made of any country.

Sadly, too much criticism is influenced by propaganda and background agendas - my point about many human rights activists and other campaigners. I don't doubt that there are some, many, protestors who will campaign against Israel, but will also campaign against China, Syria, Russia, etc, etc.

But for many, Israel is the only target for their human rights concerns. I'm not going to accuse them all of anti-Semitism, although I'm sure some are, but I rather suspect that their anger is tied up into the whole anti-American/establishment/capitalism agenda where Israel is a key ally of the USA.

That is still besides the point. Why dilute a legitimate criticism by diverting attention elsewhere?

[Sandydragon]

No it doesn't. Legitimate criticism should be made of any country.

Sadly, too much criticism is influenced by propaganda and background agendas - my point about many human rights activists and other campaigners. I don't doubt that there are some, many, protestors who will campaign against Israel, but will also campaign against China, Syria, Russia, etc, etc.

But for many, Israel is the only target for their human rights concerns. I'm not going to accuse them all of anti-Semitism, although I'm sure some are, but I rather suspect that their anger is tied up into the whole anti-American/establishment/capitalism agenda where Israel is a key ally of the USA.

That is still besides the point. Why dilute a legitimate criticism by diverting attention elsewhere?

Not my intention. The criticism may well be legitimate (equally it may be out of proportion) but the fact its being made is fair enough. What I am questioning is why some of those who protest wont share a similar opinion of human rights abuses when conducted by other countries, or non state actors. I don't think that invalidates the initial criticism made; it for me just underlines that there is a digital view of the world where one side is good and the other bad and that's the end of it. Any legitimate criticism tied up in a propaganda fuelled tirade is still legitimate, its just keeping bad company.

[morepork]

No it doesn't. Legitimate criticism should be made of any country.

Sadly, too much criticism is influenced by propaganda and background agendas - my point about many human rights activists and other campaigners. I don't doubt that there are some, many, protestors who will campaign against Israel, but will also campaign against China, Syria, Russia, etc, etc.

But for many, Israel is the only target for their human rights concerns. I'm not going to accuse them all of anti-Semitism, although I'm sure some are, but I rather suspect that their anger is tied up into the whole anti-American/establishment/capitalism agenda where Israel is a key ally of the USA.

That is still besides the point. Why dilute a legitimate criticism by diverting attention elsewhere?

Not my intention. The criticism may well be legitimate (equally it may be out of proportion) but the fact its being made is fair enough. What I am questioning is why some of those who protest wont share a similar opinion of human rights abuses when conducted by other countries, or non state actors. I don't think that invalidates the initial criticism made; it for me just underlines that there is a digital view of the world where one side is good and the other bad and that's the end of it. Any legitimate criticism tied up in a propaganda fuelled tirade is still legitimate, its just keeping bad company.

Who are these individuals? Do they wear an identification badge or anything?

[Digby]

That is still besides the point. Why dilute a legitimate criticism by diverting attention elsewhere?

Not my intention. The criticism may well be legitimate (equally it may be out of proportion) but the fact its being made is fair enough. What I am questioning is why some of those who protest wont share a similar opinion of human rights abuses when conducted by other countries, or non state actors. I don't think that invalidates the initial criticism made; it for me just underlines that there is a digital view of the world where one side is good and the other bad and that's the end of it. Any legitimate criticism tied up in a propaganda fuelled tirade is still legitimate, its just keeping bad company.

Who are these individuals? Do they wear an identification badge or anything?

Many in some variant of a Stop the War campaign often slip into Stop the West.

[SerjeantWildgoose]

... there has been an increase in anti-Semitism in Europe, partly due to perceptions of Israel's conduct, and it amazes me that people cant disassociate the actions of a country that has a majority Jewish religion to people of that religion who may, or may not, be from that country ...

I will give you that this is true to an extent (And an abysmal extent at that) but it is also due in part to the likes of Macron and our own Labour Party who inflate perceptions of such an increase by conflating legitimate criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism. I also agree that too many allow their legitimate criticism of the Israeli state to spill over into discrimination against individual Israelis, which is a step closer, but in my view not quite anti-Semitism.

I agree, for example, with the principle of the cultural boycott. I recognise that refusing to purchase a ticket to see or hear a cultural event from Israel is discriminatory, that the performer or artist is in all probability Jewish and that there is an equal probability that they have no personal responsibility for any of the Israeli states criminal excesses - other than that Israel prides itself on being the region's only democracy and therefore its citizens share in the responsibility of its elected government. Of course, lets remember that some of those who live in the state of Israel cannot share in this responsibility because they do not enjoy the full electoral rights of citizen, but they tend not to be J ... well, you get my drift.

Your point about exclusivity of protest does not carry a great deal of validity. If a protest is legitimate, the protestor should not be de-legitimised simply because they chose only to protest on that issue. Campaigning against illegal Israeli settlements is no less correct simply because the campaigner remains silent over Russian seizure of the Crimea, is it?

Perhaps it is worth examining whether it is the attempted denial of the right to legitimate protest that draws so many to the protest?

[Sandydragon]

I completely agree that trying to stifle debate can have the opposite effect. An example from this country would be the immigration debate.

I don't agre with the term delegitimise. It's too binary. I accept that some people feel strongly about certain issues and don't get involved in other campaigns. But I'm not really referring to them in my comments, I suspect they would agree that the Russian invasion of Crimea was wrong, but wouldn't go on a march about it.

But some people do undermine their own arguments. In this particular context, blaming Israel for every event in the world they find bad in some way. Israelis pulling a the strings of western leaders. It's an evolution of the blood libel and pushes that anti Israeli message into something a bit more sinister. What about active online campaigners against Israel who refuse to accept any facts that's counter their argument, we condemn Trump for his fake news approach do we not?

To change the context, it was clear that there were areas in the UK where immigration was causing a problem. The discussion on how this should be dealt with was hijacked by some who blamed immigrants for every social ill. Would I call a teacher racist who was worried that heir class now contained over 30 children, none of whom spoke English and who had received no support. No. When the leader of the EDL uses that fact as part of the wider rant on immigrants, does that reduce his credibility? I'd argue that he has already done that. But it does make it easier to ignore the fact be when presented by someone whose motives are questionable. That's a fact of political discourse.

[paddy no 11]

Whats the participation rate in Isreal in the IDF? 95%+

[canta_brian]

Is supporting a free Tibet seen as anti Confucianism?

[SerjeantWildgoose]

Whats the participation rate in Isreal in the IDF? 95%+

Nowhere near. Conscription extends to those over 18, but only to Jewish, Druze and Circassians. Arab citizens of Israel are not concripted but can volunteer.

There are a number of exemptions and an increasing prevalence of avoidance. The IDF's own statistics estimate that about 30% of those eligible for compulsory military service either apply under one of the exceptions or simply ignore the call-up.

[OptimisticJock]

What are their sanctions for ignoring the call up? And how do so many qualify for exemptions?