[lbo-talk] Noam Chomsky is losing it

SA s11131978 at gmail.com
Wed Sep 28 20:02:26 PDT 2011


On 9/28/2011 10:15 PM, Joseph Catron wrote:


> Just come out and say what you mean: Edward Said and Mustafa Barghouti
> and
>> Hanan Ashrawi are all racist anti-Palestinians because of their support for
>> a two state settlement.
>>
> And, predictably, the distortions and lies. You seem determined to confuse
> everyone by conflating rights (on which every Palestinian, with hardly any
> exceptions, agrees) with statehood (about which various people and factions
> have different strategic ideas). Hopefully everyone will be too astute to
> fall for it. The question here is one of basic Palestinian rights, including
> the right to return.
>
> Said's position is hardly a secret (
> http://www.mediamonitors.net/edward6.html). Nor is Barghouti's (
> http://umkahlil.blogspot.com/2006/09/open-question-to-dr-mustafa-barghouti.html),
> which I saw him emphasize in person a few months ago.

Joe, you're deluding yourself.

In this link you're posting, Barghouti is quoted saying: "We have to be realistic. We cannot just say all of them [the refugees] have to come back immediately tomorrow, because this will be the end of Israel . Let’s be frank about it."

Then, in response to a request for clarification, he replies: "The Right of Return itself cannot be negotiated, although its implementation can, because rights are rights, and are not subject to negotiation. I doubt that there is anything wrong with also stating that it is unrealistic to expect that all refugees will return at once, tomorrow."

His position is identical to Chomsky's:


> Q: Should Palestinian refugees be willing to renounce the "right of
> return" as part of a settlement?...
>
> NC: Palestinian refugees should certainly not be willing to renounce
> the right of return, but in this world -- not some imaginary world we
> can discuss in seminars -- that right will not be exercised, in more
> than a limited way, within Israel. Again, there is no detectable
> international support for it, and under the (virtually unimaginable)
> circumstances that such support would develop, Israel would very
> likely resort to its ultimate weapon, defying even the boss-man, to
> prevent it. In that case there would be nothing to discuss. The facts
> are ugly, but facts do not go out of existence for that reason.

The only reason I can see why you scream racism at Chomsky while somehow excusing Barghouti, Ashrawi and others for holding the same position is that -- to use your terminology -- Chomsky is of an "ethnically privileged group" while the others are of an "ethnically oppressed group." Frankly, this is creepy.


> What does Syria have to do with anything? And while we all know whom the
> Zionists ethnically cleansed to obtain their territory, what about Syria?

Apparently you don't know this, but Syria, which declares itself an Arab state, is 10% Kurdish. Just as Israel, which declares itself a Jewish state, is 15% Arab. You were the one who insisted on talking about "ethnic exclusivism." But I'm sure the Syrian Kurds will be glad to hear you explain that


> "Arab," incidentally, isn't a particularly racialized construct. Learn
> Arab, live in an Arab country, and your children will be Arabs. It's much
> more akin to "American" than "Jew."

You've gone over there to live, but you have a lot to learn about the place.

SA



More information about the lbo-talk mailing list