instead of the BM messages, which are unreflective of the high intellectual tone of the thread, why not respond to the learned commentary of Pollak, Forstater, Newman.org, or best of all, myself.
mbs
Hi,
AAAAAAAAOOOOOOGGGGAAAA!!!
LOGICAL FALLACIES ALERT!
----- Original Message ----- From: "Brad Mayer" <bradley.mayer at ebay.sun.com> To: <lbo-talk at lists.panix.com> Sent: Wednesday, August 01, 2001 10:30 PM Subject: Re: Anti-Zionism Is Racism
<<SNIP>>
> 1) There is no "independent Jewish state of Israel". "Israel" - as I will
> never tire of repeating - is an annex of the United States, pure and
> simple, nothing more. "
Reductionism barely begins to scratch the surface of this statement. But to make its clear, let's remember why some of us used to groan every time we heard:
" There is no independent socialist state of Cuba. Cuba, as I will never tire of repeating - is an annex of the Soviet Union, pure and simple, nothing more. "
Henry K, oops, I mean Brad M. surely cannot actually mean that Israel is "nothing more" than a puppet that automatically does whatever the US tells it to do, because that, of course, is easy to disprove with a library card. This claim of "dual-loyalist" puppetry is what antisemitic right-wing conspiracy theorists claim. Or am I responding to the wrong list again? This isn't the Liberty Lobby list is it? Oh, that's right, they have briefly folded. I guess their arguments had to go somewhere.
> 2) Zionism is an _ideology_ and a _political movement_, not an
> ethno-cultural attribute. As such, it is a specifically _American_
> ideology and political movement <<SNIP>> Zionism has no more to do with >
"Jews" than Nazism had to do
> with "Germans" or emperor worship had to do with "Japanese". In fact, in
> the end, the representatives of the latter two ideologies pursued, as
> conscious policy, the deliberate destruction of "their own" peoples,
> failing only due to lack of power, in Hitler's case, or lack of ruling
> class support, in Hirohito's case. Zionism poses the same specific danger
> to the Jewish people -in the end, which will come.
OMIGOD! I will have to throw out 200 books on fascism that ignorantly conclude that fascist states actually thought they were representing the interests of the "Volk" not "deliberately" trying to destroy them. I also appreciate the argument that we should ignore history. God forbid we should be condemned to repeat this discussion.
What a novel concept. Ideological movement leaders "deliberately" seek to destroy their "imagined communities." Of course, if this was true, then we really would be a Planet of the Apes, having relentlessly pursued our own destruction into extinction. This isn't the Left-Over Economic Apes list is it?
> 3) What these ideologies and political movements have in common is not
> "nationalism" but capitalism and imperialism.
> Is it clear now? To respond to this with issues pertaining to
> nationalities is to engage the argument presented here in a non
> sequitur. Such responses can be safely ignored by us true "rootless
> cosmopolitans".
OK, how about they involve a potent mixture of nationalism, capitalism, populism, and imperialism; as well as a number of other factors?
Logic often goes out the window in discussions of Zionism, Jews, and Israel, but this post is a stunning example of the problem. Can we please lower the level of hysteria? Can we at least try to construct arguments that pass a simple logic test?
Can we be more specific and careful about the differences among Zionism, Jews, Israel the state, the various political movements and parties in Israel, race, nationality, ethnicity, religion, nationalism, imperialism, capitalism, fascism, oppression, repression, institutional forms of racism, consensual forms of racism, policies, practices, etc.?
If this is a "Left" list, I would be much happier reading posts that did not appear to be identical to the material I read everday from the fascist right. I am actually very critical of many policies of Israel. I recognize that not all criticisms of Zionism are antisemitic. But the direction and level of this discussion is very depressing. Brad, I actually see glimmers of content that I might agree with in your post, but try again without the "never," "nothing," "always," "deliberate," rhetoric that sent this post off into logical fallacy land and (clearly unintentional) mimicry of far right arguments.
Wearily,
-Chip Berlet