The reason I make the public repudiation of the anti-Semitism charge the condition for reconciliation is that, if Lerner in fact believes that ANSWER is full of anti-Semites and its tactical allies are accomplices in anti-Semitism, he, as a self-respecting Jew, has _no_ business trying to get himself invited to become a featured speaker. Indeed, he, as a Jewish public figure, has _a moral obligation_ to _refuse_ to associate himself with such a coalition of coalitions in any way -- even if he were asked to dilate for six hours to explain his "complex" view from the podium -- _unless_ the coalition leaders -- from ANSWER as well as others -- publicly atone for anti-Semitism. Either Lerner believes his own charge, or he doesn't. Let us see which it is. He can't have it both ways. His trying to have it both ways reduces anti-Semitism to a trivial matter, just a card one plays when one jockeys for media time; such trivialization should not be countenanced.
The Lerner flap in part resulted from his accusation that all who think and say publicly that Jewish-Israelis have no right to a Jewish state -- that is, Jewish-Israelis have no right to have _Jewish supremacy_ written into law, maintained by political practice, and supported by ideology, in such a way as to relegate Palestinian-Israelis to second-class citizenship and to exclude Palestinian exiles' right of return -- are ipso facto _anti-Semites_ as they refuse to recognize "Israel's right to exist" as a Jewish state (that's what his accusation against ANSWER amounts to in reality).
Advocacy of Palestinians' right of return, including the right to return to areas _inside_ its 1948 borders, depends on the endorsement of a possibility that Jews _may_ become a numerical minority in the state of Israel. I don't think that _all_ Palestinian exiles and their descendants would wish to exercise their right of return by actually coming back to live in Israel, as many of them are citizens of other states including the USA, but there is a possibility that Israel, originally founded and still maintained as a Jewish state, may cease to be so if Palestinians' right of return is granted. That is an outcome incompatible with "Israel's right to exist" in the eyes of most people -- in Israel or the USA, on the left or on the right or at the center -- who use the term. Is it anti-Semitic to advocate Palestinians' right of return? Why? We might be able to clarify where everyone stands on the matter if Lerner, as well as ANSWER and its allies, squarely confronted his anti-Semitism charge.
There are advocates of two-state solutions, and there are advocates of two-state solutions. Advocates of two-state solutions should be welcomed in the anti-war movement, but not the advocates of two-state solutions who make it impossible for anyone to support Palestinians' right of return and right to armed resistance against the occupation without being charged with anti-Semitism.
Converse questions may be asked of those who support Palestinians' right of resist the occupation. Do they think that Jews have the right to live in what are now Israel, the West Bank, and Gaza, as well as in any Arab states, as equal citizens to others (as opposed to colonial settlers who have supremacy over native inhabitants and set on displacing them)? If so, affirm it publicly and unmistakably. Do Palestinians in resistance have a moral and political obligation to abide by the Geneva Conventions and other relevant international laws? If so, condemn suicide bombings that _target civilians_ firmly and publicly, _without_ denying Palestinians the right to resistance -- including armed resistance -- against the IDF and armed settlers.
The same efforts to achieve moral and political clarity while attempting to unite all who can be united would be welcome with regard to red-baiting. Do Marxists (as opposed to "historical materialists," i.e. those for whom Marxism is merely or mainly a social theory) have a place in an anti-war movement? If so, what place? In what manner should non-Leninists relate to Leninists in an anti-war movement? Do we want to build an anti-war movement focused on _this_ war or an anti-imperialist movement opposed to the US empire's military, economic, and political hegemony in all its manifestations or both at the same time? -- Yoshie
* Calendar of Events in Columbus: <http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/calendar.html> * Student International Forum: <http://www.osu.edu/students/sif/> * Committee for Justice in Palestine: <http://www.osudivest.org/> * Al-Awda-Ohio: <http://groups.yahoo.com/group/Al-Awda-Ohio> * Solidarity: <http://solidarity.igc.org/>