> P.S. I am not a supporter of Israel. I am wary of
> even having a position, and I am glad that nobody on
> the list has asked me to give away (as opposed to
> attributing one to me).
>
> I suppose if pressed, I would say I am opposed in
> principle to all states, but as long as we have
> states, I do not think one has the right to deny the
> right of existence of a self-defining Jewish state
> that already exists in reality. And I think it is
> questionable, bordering on anti-semitic, for people
> who focus so intensely on Israeli state crimes.
While I will accept that a small amount of criticism against Israel is anti-semitic (a very, very small amount), I think that the reasons why Israel gets the attention that it does within activist circles are quite different than your suggestion. I think the focus probably has to do with a number of reasons. Globally, Israel became a settler state at the same time as massive decolonization. I would accept the premise that the origin of all states have some degree of illegitimacy, the battles over the Sudetenland is a bit more academic than say the West Bank and the Gaza strip. This made its crimes stick out. Within the United States, I suspect that a lot of the passion around the question of Israel has to do with the parallels with the creation of the United States... both creation narratives are dependent on religious persecution and making the desert bloom. There is also a substantial amount of activism on the part of Jewish activists who feel responsible for the Israeli state and feel the need to change it (no doubt due to the state's effort to link Jewish identity with its continued existence.) I should also note that the vast majority of activists within the U.S. at least recognize the existence of Israel (it's kinda hard to avoid). It would seem (at least to me) that the people who are in the occupied territories who are currently being blockaded and are dangerously low on food perhaps are in a bit more need of having their existence defended.
robert wood