[lbo-talk] real world labels include 'zionism' and 'zionist'

Jon Johanning zenner41 at mac.com
Tue Dec 28 10:38:50 PST 2004


Everyone knows about the Zionist history behind the founding of Israel, the Holocaust (well, everyone but Holocaust deniers), etc., etc. What I'm interested in is how the violence in that part of the world can be ended, if at all possible, and it seems to me that the way to do that is to empower the people in both Israel and Palestine who want to settle it, as opposed to the people who want to keep it going. What is your position on that?

(BTW, I don't know about whether modern Hebrew is authentically "semitic" or not, but I do know that almost no human languages have ever been "pure" anything, since humans constantly borrow from each others' languages. The very language we are writing in is a prime example; should we renounce it and go back to Old English, which wasn't "pure" either? In any case, I think that a traditional left position on language is that everyone should be allowed to speak whatever language or languages they want.)

On Dec 28, 2004, at 12:34 AM, John Bizwas wrote:


> Why don't you anwser the question I asked you in the previous post?

I suppose you are referring to this:


> Which puts zio-liberals like Pollack and Friedman exactly where on
> your spectrum of defined positions? Aspects like this are important to
> consider if we are to make any sense at all of articles like the
> Guardian one that Marvin Gandall just posted. Afterall, is a person
> really a 'liberal secularist' if that person supports pro-war policies
> in favour of zionist Israel?
> I think that are plenty of clearly defined positions outside the
> bookends you are talking about--besides how many times have I seen the
> illusory 'left' berated on this list for lack of clarity?

I didn't answer those questions because I couldn't understand quite what you were asking. But since I have the opportunity, I can ask. By "zio-liberals," do you mean people who are not committed to eliminating Israel? I suppose they are in the middle of the spectrum. As for "liberal secularists," I don't see why they can't support the present policies of the government of Israel (which by the way I of course do not agree with). Where is the contradiction?

Sure, there are lots of clearly defined positions in the "mainstream," but talking about the "mainstream" as though it were a single position is very obscurantist. Of course, once we get down to the hard work of distinguishing the positions of individual persons and individual groups, most highly-charged political folks quickly loose interest. They prefer stereotypes.

I don't know what you are referring to by "the illusory 'left' berated on this list for lack of clarity." You'd have to quote some specific examples.

Jon Johanning // jjohanning at igc.org __________________________ A sympathetic Scot summed it all up very neatly in the remark, 'You should make a point of trying every experience once, excepting incest and folk-dancing.' -- Sir Arnold Bax



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list