Anti Isreal = Anti-Semetism?

[Jim heartfield]

In message <02d501be590d$7690ca80$9dbb8482 at nsn2>, Nathan Newman
<nathan.newman at yale.edu> writes
>Israel has more failings in some areas, but also has some better attributes
>such as voting rights and basic civil liberties for minorities within its
>regular borders.   It is a democracy - however flawed - which is more than
>one can say about any of the surrounding states, save ironically the
>Palestianian Authority.

The trouble with the check-list approach to Israel's record on civil
liberties is that it removes the understanding of this administrative
and strategic formation from the historical  forces which gave rise to
it. The state of Israel owes its existence to the imposition of Western
control over the middle east. It has no viable existence outside of the
role of policeman in the region (which incidentally is why it is in
trouble right now).

Of course it can be equally argued that the other middle Eastern states
are equally founded on the defeat of Arab nationalism and the logic of
liberation in the middle east compromises these states, too.

But as far as the check list approach goes, Israel's record is steeped
in the suppression of the rights of the Palestinians.

The subject heading of this strand is false. Zionism is an adaptation to
anti-Semitism, not a challenge to it. Zionism starts from the premise
that it is impossible for Jews and non-Jews to live together. The
necessity for an independent state in Zionist theory rests on the
presumption that anti-Semitism is an eternal, natural given. 
-- 
Jim heartfield