I certainly do deny that Israel is the state of a racial group, but I am weary of rehashing that story. I do grant that in the vein of race being a social construct, to a lot of people jews are a racial group. Israel is a jewish state, so by that reasoning Israel is a racialist state. --mbs
Max--
Forgive me for not being terribly interested in whether you are a cold war liberal, whether you automatically react negatively to 'serious criticism of Israel' or seek to 'police the bounds of acceptable debate,' or whether you stigmatize Finkelstein for a focus on the ME. There certainly are people who fit these descriptions, and there certainly are attempts -- even on the "left" -- to see that things said about other polities are not said about Israel.
But then you admit as much, when you deny that Israel can be regarded as analogous to "the state of some other racial group." Regards, CGE
On Sun, 24 Mar 2002, Max B. Sawicky wrote:
> Hey CGE,
>
> You will forgive me for changing the subject header. Or maybe not. No
> matter.
>
> Do you really think I'm a 'cold war liberal'? That I automatically
> react negatively to 'serious criticism of Israel' or seek to 'police
> the bounds of acceptable debate'? That I stigmatize Finkelstein for a
> focus on the ME?
>
> I have to wonder about your capacity for elementary reading
> comprehension. (About others' there is no ambiguity, nor any point in
> dialog.)
>
> Talk about insinuations. But thanks so much for separating the ad
> hominem's from the 'generally correct.'
>
> I would say the real effort to 'police,' however pathetic and
> transparent, comes from descriptions of those critical of zionism as
> uncritical, solely when we object to a creepy fixation on jews or
> judaism, if not worse. In the anti-Israel crusade, there is no room
> for such considerations. Too PC, I guess.
>
> Your last sentence obliges me to ask, do you really regard Israel as
> analogous to "the state of some other racial group"?
>
> See what I mean?
>
> mbs
>
> ************************************************
>
>
>
> Pradeep seems to me generally correct here, without the ad hominems.
> The recent discussion of Cockburn on lbo-talk evinces a sort of
> antisemite-baiting that polices the bounds of acceptable debate, to
> avoid the "preoccupation" that a Chomsky shows (or is it a Different
> Thing with Chomsky?). When one comes to speak of Israel and American
> policy, one must never be -- as apparently Cockburn and Finkelstein,
> to their everlasting shame, occasionally are -- "bereft of relevant
> context." That would be to regard Israel as one would the state of
> some other racial group. --CGE
>
>
>