Comments

1. lacy wrote:

   Beautiful. Excellent read to start my day. I am much more aware of my own ignorance and the need to remedy it, an awareness that I consider a gift.

   Posted 20 May 2008 at 7:54 am ¶

2. gatamala wrote:

   Great!

   Posted 20 May 2008 at 9:06 am ¶

3. Matt wrote:

   A common mistake that many anti-Islamic and even well-intentioned conservatives make is that they think anti-Zionism equates anti-Jewish

   I appreciate that there’s a lot that’s important in what you write, but this is where I begin to disagree. I think here, because I disagree with you, you would start to see me as a conservative. I feel like I’ve been turned into a conservative because I disagree. Before today, I’ve been mislabeled repeatedly because of my perspective on the issues here. I’ve been called “neo-con” and “Zionist” as if these were racial epithets, and I think that by referring to those with whom you would disagree as “conservatives” you feed into that.

   Being opposed to antisemitism doesn’t make me a conservative. Caring about the existence and security of Israel doesn’t make me a conservative. These used to be left/liberal issues!

   So how do you view me when I disagree with you? I wonder if you’re reluctant to see me as a Jew, because you don’t want to be in opposition to Jews as such, so you choose to see me as a conservative. But that’s a way of ignoring what I think as a Jew.

   So, while anti-Zionism isn’t identical to antisemitism (and I insist on “antisemitism” because it tells the important story of the creation of the word in Germany in the late 1800s) you’ve managed to elide over a thousand issues here. Among them, how blatant and extreme antisemitism –the sort you’d hear from neo-Nazis– gets called “anti-Zionism,” and excused because “anti-Zionism isn’t antisemitism.” Sometimes, it is antisemitism. In my experience, almost all anti-Zionism is, though I won’t equate the two. And even when anti-Zionism isn’t antisemitic, Jews are right to be wary about it for reasons that get ignored.

   Do you realize that when you link to the website “Deir Yassin Remembered,” their Board of Advisors includes the extreme antisemite Israel Shamir? That their Board of Directors includes the extreme antisemite Paul Eisen who speaks lovingly of Holocaust deniers who have been convicted for their hate speech?

   I think often when people disagree on these issues, the tendency is to assume that the other side isn’t listening to us. I think you feel like you’re not being heard, but I’m asking you to listen more carefully.

   You write, “I would like Israelis (and those who support Israel) to know that Muslims do not hate Jews and that there is nothing within Islam that teaches us to hate or kill them.” Can you deny that the Hamas Charter says, “After Palestine, the Zionists aspire to expand from the Nile to the Euphrates. When they will have digested the region they overtook, they will aspire to further expansion, and so on. Their plan is embodied in the ‘Protocols of the Elders of Zion’, and their present conduct is the best proof of what we are saying.” It isn’t Islam or Muslims as some homogeneous mass-entity that hate Jews or Israel, but it’s undeniable that there are Muslims who hate me because I’m Jewish.

   You write, “I personally do not feel that the state of Israel should have been created without a Palestinian state.” Well, I would have preferred that two states been created together. But I have to wonder how you can fail to mention that the Zionist leadership prior to the creation of Israel accepted three compromises that were rejected by the Arabs. How you can fail to mention that the Arabs declined to declare a state alongside Israel because their leadership refused to accept the existence of Israel, instead starting a war with openly genocidal aims. Or that the official policy of contemporary Israel is that there ought to be a Palestinian state.

   There’s a lot I agree with in your post, and I hope you’ll understand why I’ve focused more on disagreements. I do hope we can have a productive conversation.

   Posted 20 May 2008 at 9:54 am ¶

4. Sara wrote:

   Thanks for this eloquent post. As someone with a number of Jewish friends, but no Muslim acquaintances, I tend to only hear one side of the story and my attempts to challenge these biases frequently fail because of my own ignorance of the situation. This post has helped me gain a clearer understanding.

   Posted 20 May 2008 at 10:03 am ¶

5. The Cruel Secretary wrote:

   @ Jehanzeb–
   This is an gorgeously written post, and it crystallizes what I’ve been thinking about the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

   A bouquet of gratitude for this.

   Posted 20 May 2008 at 10:57 am ¶

6. f wrote:

   Thank you, Jehanzeb. This is one of the best pieces I’ve read on this.

   Posted 20 May 2008 at 11:10 am ¶

7. Shalom wrote:

   I appreciate the post and attempt to present this complex situation in a balance and fair but I have to acknowledge that the historical facts you present are biased. The stories in history are always biased because they are being told by someone with a certain viewpoint. I don’t believe in adding negative comments on here but I feel obligated to say that saying that “The conflict between Israelis and Palestinians has NOTHING to do with Judaism and Islam” seems incredibly naive. That may be how you wish it was, but in reality is that the situation in Israel is greatly intertwined by the long history of turmoil between Jews and Muslims.

   Posted 20 May 2008 at 11:33 am ¶

8. Joseph wrote:

   Jehanzeb Dar has written a lovely remembrance here–including a much needed correction of some important facts about the Nakba– and it speaks for itself. The Zionist responses are about what I assumed they’d be so far too.
   @Matt
   You have said a lot too but there is one thing it is important to address right away before this discussion moves forward: If you say that–in your experience–anti-Zionism is a slippery slope with anti-Jewish sentiments then I believe you. Such sentiments exist and are pernicious and must be challenged. BUT–”Anti-Zionism” and “Anti-Jewish sentiments” are absolutely NOT The same thing in the larger world of this argument. And maintaining that they are is a way to foreclose honest discussion of the facts about Israel, which is a notorious human-rights violator. Is it true that anti-Asian sentiments saturate western culture? Absolutely. Does that mean we should not have an honest discussion and appraisal of the horrible human rights situation in China? Absolutely not.

   Zionism is a conservative political philosophy, not a religious one–therefore it does not require a specific religious affiliation. Some of the scariest, most bloodthirsty Zionists on the planet are Christians (see: the Bush administration). Conversely, some of the most valiant voices of opposition where Israel is concerned come from Jews who say, loudly, “Not in my name.” Such Jews are mostly invisible in the popular media, and if they are noted at all it is to be excoriated by Zionists as “self-hating Jews.” Automatically equating Zionism to Anti-Jewish sentiments in defense of Israel is like saying “You oppose communism? You must hate Cubans!”

   Let me be absolutely clear: I do not care who is in charge of Israel. Even a little bit. I am not so naive as to imagine that if Christians had founded the modern state of Israel–and there were a big, blue cross on the flag instead of a star– that the situation of the Palestinians would be one whit better. There is no special feature of Judaism or ethnic “weakness” of Jewish people that sustains the oppression of the Palestinians. Their oppression is just run-of-the-mill colonialism, examples of which we find throughout Africa, Asia, South America and the Middle East. So: my opposition to Zionism and my disgust over the perpetual human rights abuses heaped on the Palestinian people by the Israeli government is exactly the opposite of Anti-Jewish sentiment.

   And I insist on “Anti-Jewish sentiment” instead of “Anti-Semitism” because making that term refer only to Jews is another way to make Arabs, who are also Semites–and who endure our own prejudice in the west every single day–disappear. And I have not disappeared.

   I am right here.

   Posted 20 May 2008 at 12:35 pm ¶

9. Matt wrote:

   Joseph, I respect where you’re coming from, but I disagree on a number of points. I linked above to this article on my blog, and I think you should address what I say there directly. I don’t, here or there, claim that anti-Zionism is necessarily antisemitic; but that is only a tiny part of the discussion. Too often, I’ve seen the assertion that “anti-Zionism is not antisemitism” used to justify the worst bigotry, as a way of shutting off discussion of what antisemitism is. And the claim that Zionists try to stifle discussion used as a way of justifying discrimination against those who have something important to say.

   Zionism is a conservative political philosophy, No, it’s not! That’s a horrible slander based on stereotypes of Zionists rather than the actual words and thoughts of real Jews. A slander that assumes the worst of Israel and assumes that every Zionist supports the worst of Israel. Early Zionists included people who favored a binational state. It always was and remains the national liberation movement of Jews. To say that such a project is conservative is to say that antisemitism is a liberal value.

   In 1879, Wilhelm Marr popularized the term ‘antisemitism’ with his pamphlets “The Victory of Jewishness over German-ness” and “The Way to Victory over Jewishness” and with his founding of “The League of Antisemites.” The word served to distinguish his new (and scientific) hatred of Jews from the disrespectful Judenhass (Jew-hatred). It was only later that anyone realized who else could be attached to the word “Semitic,” when European Orientalists, confounding linguistic and racial categories, began to argue that Arabs must share racial traits with the Jews. The word antisemitism has always meant hatred of Jews, and it preserves the history of how Judenhass could be revived with a simple name change in a country where hatred of Jews was abhorred and marginalized. Only recently was there a disingenuous attempt to claim that Arabs couldn’t be antisemites.

   Posted 20 May 2008 at 1:12 pm ¶

10. Abu Sinan wrote:

    Great post and spot on. As Muslims we must work to get this conflict into perspect. Palestine is NOT the sixth pillar of Islam, at the same time we owe it to support our brother and sisters in Islam in Palestine, just as much as we owe it to support it as nothing more than a human rights and humanitarian issue.

    I love the quoted lyrics sung by Natacha Atlas. I think she is the best Arabic singer today and much under recognised. I have done some transation for her website and cannot get enough of her.

    I want get into discussions with your detractors here. With years of doing that on blogs, as well as 20 some years of doing it in the USA, Europe and the Middle East, first hand, I find it go nowhere.

    Posted 20 May 2008 at 2:05 pm ¶

11. harrumph wrote:

    I think there are valid points on both sides of this debate, but unfortunately I’m at work and don’t have time to get too far into it.

    I do, however, want to say, Matt, that your questions about the formation of the modern Israeli state are deeply disingenuous.

    “But I have to wonder how you can fail to mention that the Zionist leadership prior to the creation of Israel accepted three compromises that were rejected by the Arabs. How you can fail to mention that the Arabs declined to declare a state alongside Israel because their leadership refused to accept the existence of Israel, instead starting a war with openly genocidal aims.”

    Compromises? Surely you know your history. To use a tired analogy: some guy comes into your house and starts squatting in your living room. You’re like “dude, what are you doing in my living room?” and he says “yeah, I’m gonna live here now, so it’s my house too — I was actually thinking I’d have the whole ground floor and you can have the rooms upstairs.” A reasonable compromise? No, not really. Maybe his grandmother used to live in your house. Do you really care?

    Also, come on. The Arabs started the war? Their intentions and actions during the war were not all defensible, but that’s like saying the British started the American Revolution.

    Posted 20 May 2008 at 2:26 pm ¶

12. Joseph wrote:

    @Matt
    I don’t want to dominate this conversation with a flurry of posts so I will answer you here (as I have on the other thread) and then take a break…these conversations take a toll on me and I want to open a space for others to speak up. I also really, really need to do some laundry…

    I will admit to being bemused that your attachment to the term “anti-Semitism” is to preserve the sense arrived at by Nazi pseudo-science. Especially when “Judenhass” tells the whole story in a nutshell, doesn’t it? It is true that there is ambivalence about the label “Semite” among some Arabs. I probably shouldn’t be this blunt but: tough, that is their problem. It is what it is and we are cousins you and I. As I said in the other thread if there had been a significant Arab minority in Germany we would have joined you in the gas chambers. If you are truly committed to peace then I wish you’d rethink using a term that–linguistically–makes me vanish.

    Matt, you admit that “anti-Zionism” is not automatically synonymous with (let me just try this out here) “Judenhass” but then you say that characterizing Zionism as essentially conservative is tantamount to…anti-Semitism!

    Matt, I do not mean this disrespectfully but “a national liberation movement for (fill in a religious or ethnic group here) is an essentially conservative ideology. It is incompatible with democracy to found a state in which one group has rights that others cannot share, based on their religious or ethnic affiliations. In other words, based on who they are. That is pretty much the broadest possible definition of un-democratic. Refer here to Orwell’s Animal Farm.

    I will say again: it matters not at all to me which religious group is oppressing the Palestinians. I do not believe (and in fact I think it is not only “Judenhass” but naive to believe) that there is anything at all specific to Jews or Judaism that plays a significant role in the oppression of Palestinians. It is important to remember that the modern state of Israel was founded not by Jews, but by the English– who did what colonizers do, waved their magic wands to make borders, nations and people appear and disappear. The biblical Israel, the idea of which sustained Jews during unimaginable pain and loss, is not the same as the modern state called “Israel.”

    If you (and Christians and Muslims all over the world) have a religious attachment to this chunk of land I cannot speak to that. I can only respond to the policies of the Israeli government, which are oppressive and antagonistic to peace–in the Middle East and the world.

    Posted 20 May 2008 at 2:35 pm ¶

13. Matt wrote:

    I do, however, want to say, Matt, that your questions about the formation of the modern Israeli state are deeply disingenuous.
    harrumph, a lot can be said about such things, but it is not disingenuous of me to point out that nothing was said. Jehanzeb laid claim to support for two-states in a way that truly ignored the history of the two-state solution.

    Joseph, I have a great many problems with what you say. You write,
    “a national liberation movement for (fill in a religious or ethnic group here) is an essentially conservative ideology. It is incompatible with democracy to found a state in which one group has rights that others cannot share, based on their religious or ethnic affiliations.
    You’re wrong. The Palestinian movement for an independent state is, for example, a progressive, nationalist movement. Going back, we can also see that the French Revolution was a largely progressive movement.

    Posted 20 May 2008 at 3:01 pm ¶

14. miss girl wrote:

    I wanted to contribute to the dialogue by carefully critiquing Israeli policy, but I left my Authenticated Non-Self-Hating Jew certificate in the car. Brb.

    Posted 20 May 2008 at 3:22 pm ¶

15. Matt wrote:

    worth reading

    Posted 20 May 2008 at 7:06 pm ¶

16. jvansteppes wrote:

    “The Palestinian movement for an independent state is, for example, a progressive, nationalist movement.”
    But lots of Palestinian nationalists ARE conservative in their tactics or dreams of solutions. [And this can be problematic]
    Which is not to say that nationalism is never understandable or that these movements never accomplish any good. I simply want to emphasize that they carry a conservative element too.
    The main difference I see is that Palestinians are linked to a specific region and at least where I come from, people don’t think of ‘Palestinian’ as a race, whereas being Jewish has such connotations, though I don’t know everyone’s feelings about this and won’t presume anything.
    Pleas for a racial state, a state by and for an imagined racial group [imagined to be cohesive that is] are indeed conservative, even if they aren’t right wing [intentionally or not] per se. The problem with racial states is that they are not designed for the people who live in them, they are designed for a race. Race shouldn’t be a mandate, providing accountability and security for the people who live in a country should be.

    Joseph, your comment about how you would have likely been in the chambers reminds me of the other 6 million who were murdered and worked to death because of who they were [disabled people,gypsies, homosexuals...] yet are so frequently forgotten in discussions of Nazi genocide and mass murder.

    Matt I agree with you that there are more than enough cases of anti-Jewishness masquerading itself as anti-Zionism but I’m curious to hear your opinion of anti-Zionist Jews who are accused of being self-hating or anti-Jewish etc. The fact that this is so common does highlight the fact that dismissing anti-Zionists as anti-Jewish is also a trend. I’ve heard of many people being referred to as ’self-hating blacks’ etc but those aren’t deployed in the same way.

    Posted 21 May 2008 at 12:35 am ¶

17. jvansteppes wrote:

    correction, I meant to write ‘I’ve heard of SOME people being referred to as ’self-hating’ blacks…’

    Posted 21 May 2008 at 12:38 am ¶

18. Matt wrote:

    Which is not to say that nationalism is never understandable or that these movements never accomplish any good. I simply want to emphasize that they carry a conservative element too.

    Sure, absolutely. But national liberation movements of oppressed peoples are inherently progressive in a very real way even when they contain conservative elements. And I’m not denying that there were conservative, and even reactionary, strains in Zionism – only that it cannot be characterized strictly by that minority. The dominant forms of Zionism have been fairly progressive, and the overall movement is one for eradicating prejudice. So when I hear that it’s a conservative ideology or that all Zionists are conservatives, it irks me at the least.

    It also plays into something else, that’s more difficult to explain. Prior to the rise of the Nazis in Germany, the growth of antisemitism wasn’t in a simple linear fashion. What grew most notably was the centrality of ‘the Jewish Question’ in politics. Describing Jews as conservatives because of where they stand SOLELY on that one issue without even reference to the character of their Zionism (and using “Zionist” to mean “ultra-conservative,” which I’ve seen a lot of) is a recreation of that process that obscured and allowed the growth of genocidal antisemitism. See more on that here.

    The main difference I see is that Palestinians are linked to a specific region

    It was the very nature of Jewish oppression that Jews were denied a homeland, and there is a far too common tendency to ignore that. I read your comment as denying Jews an end to oppression on the grounds that they were already too oppressed to deserve it. Makes no sense to me at all.

    I’m curious to hear your opinion of anti-Zionist Jews who are accused of being self-hating or anti-Jewish etc.

    The circles I run in, I haven’t come across that in the form where there is that special twist of the knife (except for Robert Novak, below). I have come across people I respect who have complained about it, so that I expect it probably does happen, but I haven’t seen it myself. So I say this from a very specific perspective. I think that “special twist” is important, but I can only really talk about cases where it isn’t present.

    I did once see my grandfather say that Robert Novak (who converted to Christianity supposedly so that he could avoid accusations of being self-hating) had a Jewish name. He was indicating, primarily I think, that Novak’s anti-Israel stance (which I expect does stem from antisemitism, in his case) was more hurtful to him. I do think there’s a way in which that makes sense. We’re often more hurt by people who “let us down” than by people we never expected support from. Given that, the implication that Novak is a self-hating Jew doesn’t strike me as anything more than sad.

    If someone is Jewish and claims, “The Jews killed Christ,” that’s antisemitic. Their Jewishness is not a defense. In fact, in the Middle Ages when religious themes dominated antisemitism, converted Christians were often held up as examples for other Jews to follow. And they were often the most viciously antisemitic. Torquemada was descended from Jews. The promise of assimilation has always enticed some people to assimilate in that radical way of becoming an antisemite. It’s very sad, and I think we should try to have great compassion for people put in such a bind. Additionally, we should recognize that “self-hating” is an antisemitic stereotype that we could be feeding into. But I do think we need to address antisemitic arguments even when they come from Jews.

    During the modern period when Jews were defined most strongly as a race, that promise of total assimilation wasn’t available, but today I think that medieval pattern of exploiting the promise of assimilation has been revived. One of the most prominent antisemites (not merely anti-Zionist, but someone who argues that even anti-Zionist Jews are “Christ Killers”) is of Jewish descent.

    So, as with any other group (and I think you need to include accusations of “uncle Tom,” “Oreo” or “house n*gg*r” and realize it happens more than sometimes with blacks), I would say we should avoid ad hominem arguments that focus on the identity of the speaker. We should respect when people speak from their specific experience, and in that way consider their ethnicity, but not make the fallacy that a Jew (and generally one appointed by gentiles as a token Jew to justify more extreme anti-Zionism) is always right about Jewish issues.

    Posted 21 May 2008 at 9:41 am ¶

19. Joseph wrote:

    @Matt
    “You are wrong”

    No. No I’m not.

    The movement for Palestinian liberation…i.e. kids throwing rocks at tanks (and getting shot in the head for it)…is not even a little bit the same as England giving Zionists an entire country. It isn’t enough that you make these sophistic arguments but you can’t even keep them straight: The (in your estimation) proto-Nazi Palestinians, who are scheming for a bigger, better Jewish genocide are also, in their spare time, running a progressive nationalist movement? That is the moral equivalent of the founding of Israel? Huzzuwah? Here is the punchline Matt: the argument is entirely moot anyway because… the Palestinians have no country! Applying “nationalist” anything to them betrays a profound misunderstanding of their situation. It is like comparing apples to…a grocery list that has the word “oranges” written on it.

    And…the French revolution? Seriously?

    If you really think the French revolution and the founding of Israel by English colonial fiat are the same thing then there is nothing more to say. That is…the most bizarre appropriation of history to support a Zionist argument I have ever heard. Which is saying something.

    The thing I find so dispiriting is that you genuinely seem to believe you are part of a great progressive tradition. You aren’t. Great progressive traditions are not sustained through Apartheid. Believing that they are requires a willful blindness to actual suffering that I cannot get my head around. People are being killed and maimed and oppressed every single day in your name Matt. In. Your. Name.

    How do you live with that?

    No, you know what? Don’t answer that. I agree with Abu Sinan: this is pointless. I have done the Zionist tango before and I know all the steps. It is an exercise in great privilege to banter about this as if people weren’t dying over the very things we are discussing. I shouldn’t end on a question when I’ve said I’m not returning to this conversation. I’ll just say, “be well.”

    Posted 21 May 2008 at 12:08 pm ¶

20. Matt wrote:

    That’s just plain demonization, Joseph.

    The movement for Palestinian liberation…i.e. kids throwing rocks at tanks (and getting shot in the head for it)…is not even a little bit the same as England giving Zionists an entire country.

    But heaven forbid you should look at it from the point of view of those Jews sent back to Germany on the Exodus.

    Posted 21 May 2008 at 2:40 pm ¶

21. David Schraub wrote:

    But heaven forbid you should look at it from the point of view of those Jews sent back to Germany on the Exodus.

    The St. Louis and the Sturma are even better cases, not that we’re at lack.

    Posted 21 May 2008 at 3:35 pm ¶

22. jvansteppes wrote:

    “But national liberation movements of oppressed peoples are inherently progressive in a very real way even when they contain conservative elements.”
    I disagree on that one [especially when, as in the Israel/Palestine issue, different oppressed peoples struggle with each other] but I see where you’re coming from so I can respect that premise.

    “It was the very nature of Jewish oppression that Jews were denied a homeland, and there is a far too common tendency to ignore that. I read your comment as denying Jews an end to oppression on the grounds that they were already too oppressed to deserve it.”

    I don’t know how you could read my comment in such a way. But then again, I don’t believe in racialized groups existing within distinct nation-states as a solution to oppression. Not because I want to invalidate oppression, and I really don’t think critiquing nationalism inherently does that.

    As far as Robert Novak goes, that’s not the kind of situation I was referring to and I have a feeling that we would make more sense to each other if we were talking about the same social circles. I live in Montreal, which has a very diverse Jewish population, and I have a lot of friends who identify as both secular Jews and practicing Jews who specifically receive a lot of flak for critiquing Israeli policies and the premises the state was founded on. My friends are not Torquemada, they do not talk about Christ. One of my friends was accused of oppressing her own grandmother [a Holocaust survivor] for stating that she didn’t feel more connected to Israel than to Canada, the country in which she was born.
    Another friend explained it to me a situation in which she has been called anti-semitic for opposing air strikes or specific military endeavors. In this situation there is no comparison to people who hate themselves. It reminds me of when Americans oppose the war on terror they are told they are being ‘un-American’.

    Posted 21 May 2008 at 8:53 pm ¶

23. Matt wrote:

    Thanks for the further examples, David.

    jvansteppes, you wrote that you see a difference in that the Palestinians are “linked to a specific region.” I think it’s important to ask how Jews came to be otherwise – Diaspora and exile. In other words the difference you see is that the Palestinians didn’t face the oppression of Diaspora that the Jews faced. When you compare the Palestinians to the Jews aboard the Exodus, St. Louis, and Struma, you see that being so linked to a specific region is a form of privilege. So when you point to that difference, I think to myself, “Yes, that’s exactly the point of Zionism as a response to Jewish oppression!” So long as we live in an age where power flows from the nation state –and it does, whether we like it or not, whether we’re comfortable with being nuanced about nationalism– singling out Jewish nationalism is a perverse anti-nationalism.

    As far as ’self-hating Jews’ goes, I’m not thrilled with the idea of examples I don’t have access to. In your first example, you didn’t even say who said such a thing. And nothing about the conversation that preceded it. It’s certainly possible that people made statements as you described, but I don’t feel like I can talk about those cases. Do let me clarify, though, that antisemitic Jews do not often seem self-hating. They seem self-loving and self-righteous. Did you see the video of Norman Finkelstein telling a Lebanese reporter that she was a coward for not supporting Hezbollah?

    Posted 22 May 2008 at 9:30 am ¶

24. jvansteppes wrote:

    Perhaps if Palestinians were simply called Arabs I would agree with you because that would be a similar classification. I’m emphasizing a difference between race and region which does exist. Where else in the world does it even fly to suggest that someone in a racial group approved by the nation but who lives across the world has more right to that country than its other residents? Oh yeah, European colonial states.
    How easy it is to dismiss my friend’s experience ‘for lack of context’, here’s the context, my friend didn’t want to visit Israel when she graduated high school, she wanted to go on a bike trip in Canada and was castigated by a neighbor for that fact. But you’ve stated that you can’t talk about those cases, so I guess there’s no point.

    Posted 22 May 2008 at 7:41 pm ¶

25. Matt wrote:

    Perhaps you could help me to understand why it would be different if the Palestinians were simply ‘Arabs’? (Btw, the Palestinians developed their national identity partly in response to Israel. Although there were Palestinian nationalist notions prior to that, most would have identified themselves more broadly and not specifically as Palestinians.) I would think the important matter would be that there ought to be a Palestinian state. Geez, to call the Jews trying to escape the Holocaust on boats that were sent back to Europe by Britain (in keeping with Palestinians’ wishes) a colonial power. That’s pretty awful.

    As for your example of a ’self hating Jew,’ there really isn’t a lot I can say about it. Sounds, if I take your word for it, absurd. Perhaps it’s attributable to the trauma of the Holocaust and you should be more sympathetic? Or maybe it’s just an idiosyncratic example. But how can I say?

    Posted 22 May 2008 at 9:38 pm ¶

26. Constintina wrote:

    Thank you for this post.

    Some readers/commenters might be interested in No Time to Celebrate ( http://www.notimetocelebrate.org ) a Nakba commemoration campaign that anti-Zionist Jews across North America have been working on…

    Posted 23 May 2008 at 9:47 pm ¶

27. Jehanzeb wrote:

    Salaam and peace to everyone,

    I apologize for not being able to respond sooner, as I was on a mini-vacation. I appreciate everyone’s feedback. Thank you for reading and sharing your thoughts!

    Matt — In no way am I reluctant to see you as a Jew. I had to read your comment a couple of times to understand what your angle was because I admit, sometimes, I felt like your tone was accusatory. It’s difficult to tell on the internet.

    But why would I use “anti-Zionism” to cover up “my anti-Jewish” sentiments? I don’t have anti-Jewish sentiments at all. Some of my best friends are Jewish, including my film professor who is a very close friend of mine. There are countless Jews who don’t equate anti-Zionism with anti-Semitism. What do you make of the Jews who are against Zionism? Are they “self-hating Jews?” I had an Israeli friend once who was labeled a self-hating Jew just because he opposed the Israeli military occupation. He is a very practicing Jew too, he prays, he doesn’t eat pork, he only eats Kosher meat, and he wears his kippah every day (even when playing basketball!)

    If I have failed to mention things, it is because I am more concerned with building positive and friendly relations with people rather than dispute about something that we cannot change. How can we progress forward if we continue to blame each other for what happened in the past? The Arab and Muslim leaders were not being heard by the British and they rejected the idea of a divided Palestine (one Jewish and one Muslim state) because they didn’t want to give the majority of their land away. According to my sources, Moshe Sharett, the first Israeli Foreign Minister, stated “behind closed doors to the Zionist Actions Committee on April 22nd, 1937″:

    “…in contrast to us they [Palestinian Arabs] would lose totally that part of Palestine which they consider to be an Arab country and are fighting to keep it such … They would lose the richest part of Palestine [referring Peel Commission Partition plan]; they would lose major Arab assets, the orange plantations, the commercial and industrial centers and the most important sources of revenue for their government which would become impoverished; they would lose most of the coastal area, which would also be loss to the hinterland [Palestinian] Arab states. …. This would be such an uprooting, such a shock, the likes of which had never occurred and could drown the whole thing in rivers of blood. ” (Expulsion Of The Palestinians, p. 59-60)

    The proposed partition in 1947 granted the Jewish state about 60% of the total area of Palestine? Why would the Palestinians want to give away 60% of their land?

    I don’t believe the website about Dier Yassin is anti-Jewish. I don’t believe it’s their intention to provoke anti-Jewish sentiments. I don’ t know much about Israel Shamir but from what I’ve read so far, I understand your concern, and I apologize for not acknowledging this. There are other board members on the website, not just him, and I’m sure they’re just trying to educate and enlighten people about what happened in Dier Yassin (which is what my intentions were anyway).

    There are Muslims who hate you because you’re Jewish? There are Christians, Jews, Hindus, and Atheists who hate me because I’m Muslim. But do I find their behavior and prejudices reflective of their respective groups? Absolutely not. A Christian man cursed me out, for example, but I knew he didn’t represent what a true Christian is. It is true that there is much antagonism towards Israel and the West from the Muslim world, but why is it this way? People need to investigate these questions. The Israeli military occupies the Palestinian territories and WHO supports and funds their military? The United States, right? What happens to the Palestinian refugees who are without their homes? You cannot stomp the boot of oppression on someone’s neck and expect them to not fight back. We all have emotional responses, we all have pressure points, and all the violence we see in the Middle-East is REACTIONARY.

    Of course the Israelis are going to crush a house because they’re told that they’re fighting nothing but “terrorists”. Of course the Palestinians are going to retaliate against the Israelis after they’ve lost their families and Loved ones.

    If we keep arguing about who is right, who is wrong, and who is to blame, then how far do we expect to go? It’s not about justifying people’s actions, feelings, or beliefs — it’s about UNDERSTANDING. We don’t live in those circumstances, we are not being bombed, we are not having our parents or family members stripped away from us, we are not the ones losing our children in the dawn of their lives. The Israelis and Palestinians endure this, and may God bless them for their struggles and relieve them of their sorrows. We have the responsibility to make sure that others are not treated like sub-humans, that violence and ignorance does not spread, and that people can start working towards building a brighter future. Look at the Project Abraham programs in the west; visit the Children of Abraham website that I provided. THESE are the True Believers in my honest opinion.

    That is all my entry was about — a prayer for peace.

    Salaam, Shalom, Shlama, Peace

    ~ Jehanzeb

    Posted 24 May 2008 at 12:24 pm ¶

28. Jehanzeb wrote:

    @ Shalom

    You wrote: ““The conflict between Israelis and Palestinians has NOTHING to do with Judaism and Islam” seems incredibly naive. That may be how you wish it was, but in reality is that the situation in Israel is greatly intertwined by the long history of turmoil between Jews and Muslims.”

    Incredibly naive? So are you suggesting that there is something WITHIN Islam and/or Judaism that teaches Muslims and Jews to hate and kill each other? How is it that the Muslims and Jews and Christians coexisted for centuries, especially during the Golden Age of Islam? Jews and Christians were given the protected status; they had to pay a tax, true, but only because they were not obligated to fight in battles. The idea was that the Muslims would fight, while the Jews and Christians were PROTECTED, hence the tax.

    I have the original accounts written by famous Muslim Caliphs and Imams (like Imam Ali, peace be upon him) who have explicitly expressed their tolerance and compassion towards Jewish and Christian minorities under their rule. Are you familiar with Muslim Spain? It was not only part of the Islamic Golden Age, but also the Golden Age of Jewish philosophy. Jewish culture and writings and achievements flourished under Islamic rule. Are you familiar with a man named Musa ibn Maymun? The Latins knew him as Maimonides. He was one of the greatest Jewish philosophers and even a physician for Salah Al-Din, the great Kurdish Muslim general who restored coexistence in the Kingdom of Jerusalem.

    There were extremist Muslim factions that persecuted and slaughtered Jews, but no different than the European Christians who massacred Jews (see the Crusades). Remember 1492? The Catholic Reconquest of Spain; the Muslims and Jews were executed, forced into exile, or forced into Christianity. The Jews found safe refuge where? Under the Muslim rulers.

    I reiterate that this conflict between Jews and Muslims has NOTHING to do with Judaism and Islam — it is all correlated with the creation of Israel and eviction of Palestinians.

    Please read what I wrote in my entry about cultural responses again.

    Salaam/Shalom

    ~ Jehanzeb

    Posted 24 May 2008 at 12:36 pm ¶

29. Matt wrote:

    Jehanzeb, I’m glad I came back and saw your further comment.

    But why would I use “anti-Zionism” to cover up “my anti-Jewish” sentiments? I didn’t mean to imply that you would. But many, many people do — and the common refrain that “anti-Zionism is not antisemitism” is used to cover that up. It’s gotten to the point where it angers me in and of itself because it stops important conversations. It prevents any serious understanding of what antisemitism is. Or anti-Zionism, for that matter.

    Zionism, again, is a national liberation movement for the Jewish people. Again, I always return to those people who were on the Exodus, St. Louis, and Sturma. Sari Nusseibeh asked his mother a question. (It’s worth reading the whole article.) His question returns us to then and asks how we would have acted. His mother, speaking on behalf of his father, would have gladly welcomed the Jews. I doubt anyone here would give a different answer. Yet we treat the conflict today otherwise.

    It’s always made out to be “kids throwing rocks at tanks (and getting shot in the head for it),” as someone wrote above. And in that telling, I’m not allowed to be for the existence and security of Israel without someone telling me I’m in favor of killing children. And if I fight the demonization of Israelis who are rightfully opposed to the terrorism they face, if I were to point out how the statement echoes the Blood Libel (Jews as sadistic killers of children – why else would a kid be shot like that except if Jews are sadists) I am demonized. “People are being killed and maimed and oppressed every single day in your name Matt. In. Your. Name.” This is the same as when people call you a terrorists sympathizer for caring about the Palestinians.

    Anti-Zionism too often fails to address the needs of those Jews on those ships, and it fails to address the needs of Jews today who have real fears that the same circumstance could reappear. It elides the fact that Israel was not always so powerful. And in that way, it often becomes antisemitic by treating the Jews of then as if they were making choices under the circumstances of today, in order to explain Hamas’ hatred as Israel’s fault.

    How can we progress forward if we continue to blame each other for what happened in the past? I agree with this very much, but then why do you immediately after saying this go on to bring up the past? A telling of the past that I disagree with, by the way. David Ben Gurion was quoted by Benny Morris as saying, “We must evict the Palestinians and take their land.” But the quote was mistaken. Ben Gurion had actually said, “We do not need and do not wish to…” When the typo was discovered, the Hebrew editions of Morris’ book were updated. The English versions weren’t. The telling of this history is not settled, and it is as filled with racism against both sides as any other part of the debate. It’s that kind of history -obsessed with the “original sin” than essentializes the other in order to forgive our own- that I want to move away from.

    But I think that view of Zionism as an original sin, that ignores the differences between the settlers of today and the Jews sent back to Germany on those ships lives among the anti-Zionism you would tell us isn’t antisemitic. And I think that kind of anti-Zionism is antisemitic.

    When you wrote, “A common mistake that many anti-Islamic and even well-intentioned conservatives make is that they think anti-Zionism equates anti-Jewish,” you left me out. I am a Jew, a leftist, and a Zionist. I am a Zionist because I am a leftist. Most Jews are Zionists because we are left/liberals. You can’t have a dialog with Jews without addressing people like me, but I feel excluded from your address.

    You didn’t say anything negative about any Palestinians or anything positive about any Israelis. You didn’t offer any reason why someone might be a Zionist except if they’re bigots. When we whitewash our own side, we inevitably demonize the other. That’s what I found so frustrating about this whole discussion.

    Posted 25 May 2008 at 9:15 pm ¶

30. ALLEGRO wrote:

    If not the holocaust Israel might have been created earlier with more Jews as inhabitants and the mass numbered Jews were withhold the Arabs to claim all of the land for themselves. But the holocaust sin made continuous problems for the Jews and the Arabs in Palestine.
    Any way, the Arabs in Palestine have their own state since 1922. Jordan contains about 80% of Palestinian Arabs next to the Bedouin-Saudi Arabs. When the Arab refugees will return to their state in Jordan they will be about 98% of the citizens of their national state.

    Hence, therefore, the only justice and stable solution for the “Palestinian problem” is by creating two national states for two peoples and not 3 states (Jordan, Palestine, Israel). Jews and Arabs will be free live where ever they choose. Jews will vote the Knesset in Jerusalem and the Arabs to the Parliament in Aman. This should be the basic for endurable solution to the deep problem.

    Posted 02 Jun 2008 at 6:38 am ¶

31. Lyonside wrote:

    >If not the holocaust Israel might have been created earlier with more Jews as inhabitants and the mass numbered Jews were withhold the Arabs to claim all of the land for themselves

    While we’re playing Historical What-If, without the Holocaust, more people of Jewish descent who ultimately ended up in the newly-flounded Israel may have instead felt SECURE WHERE THEY WERE, making the previous calls for a nation-state less imperative, and possibly resulting in the creation of a Jewish state somewhat later, possibly with better, more equitable results.

    Posted 02 Jun 2008 at 8:58 am ¶

32. Question wrote:

    To the Racialicious Editors

    I know I’m commenting really late on this article, but…

    “In 1982, the prime minister of Israel, Ariel Sharon, ordered the massacre of Palestinians in Lebanese refugee camps. He formed an alliance with a Lebanese Christian militia-men, who were permitted to enter two Palestinian refugee camps (Sabra and Shatila) in an area controlled by the Israeli military. They massacred thousands of Palestinian civilians — something that the Palestinians and the Muslim world will never forget.”

    I could be wrong, but from what I read, Ariel Sharon never ordered the massacre. The Christian militia men carried it out. Granted, the Israeli army allowed it to happen, which was almost as bad, but I would do a double-check on the source of that information.

    Posted 26 May 2009 at 6:39 pm ¶