> Practical political strategy calls for ignoring, _completely_, the
> "Jewish" Lobby.
I agree with Carrol more often than not, but on this occasion beg to differ.
The Israel lobby is, I think uncontrovertibly, a consequential component in the drive for war and intervention in the Middle East. (Just how consequential compared to other elements is subject to debate -- endless debate.)
That being so, it seems extraordinary to suggest ignoring it. Much of the ideological justification for decades of American meddling -- not to use harsher terms -- in the region emanates from the lobby. It's not only a good argumentative strategy, it's also accurate, to suggest that many of the hawks are really just carrying Israel's water, though they may try to couch their arguments in US-centered terms.
This leads naturally to the question, And just what has Israel done for *you* lately, Joe & Jane Citizen? Why should you be asked to back up these creeps on every occasion?
Wouldn't it be nice if more Americans started asking themselves that question, and wondering whether the war drums they keep hearing were really being sounded on their behalf, or on Israel's?
I sense in this discussion a certain squeamishness about the topic because people are worried about appearing, or being ' made to appear, anti-Semitic, or about encouraging anti-Semitism.
We've just got to get over that -- become post-anti-anti-Semites, or something. Anti-Semitism is a spent force -- a kooky, marginal outlook. No Cossacks are saddling up anywhere, or are likely to. This squeamishness just inhibits us from talking in plain straightforward terms about a very important element of the contemporary Holy Alliance for reaction, repression, and aggression.
--
Michael Smith mjs at smithbowen.net http://stopmebeforeivoteagain.org http://fakesprogress.blogspot.com http://cars-suck.org