babble home
rabble.ca - news for the rest of us
today's active topics

Topic Closed  Topic Closed


  
FAQ | Forum Home
  next oldest topic   next newest topic
» babble   » archived babble   » the middle east and central asia   » Is the Left Anti-Semitic?

Email this thread to someone!    
Author Topic: Is the Left Anti-Semitic?
Rundler
editor
Babbler # 2699

posted 20 February 2003 12:04 PM      Profile for Rundler     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Left-wing political parties and their supporters around the world have become increasingly vocal in their criticisms of Israel. Zionists on the right, and even some on the left, claim antipathy to Israel can only be understood as anti-Semitism. It’s an ideological and political minefield, and it’s obscuring the real root of the growing criticism of Israel among progressives: the perception that Israel is Imperial America’s attack dog.

http://www.rabble.ca/everyones_a_critic.shtml?x=19186


From: the murky world of books books books | Registered: May 2002  |  IP: Logged
Man With No Name
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3771

posted 20 February 2003 12:55 PM      Profile for Man With No Name     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
There anti-Semites on both sides of the political coin. What may make the left seem more anti-Semitic it the 'enemy of your enemy is your friend' analogy. Some of these left-wing groups are sympathing with real, anti-Semite states like Egypt and Syria.
From: Toronto | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 20 February 2003 01:42 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Really? Do name a few?
From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
evenflow
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3493

posted 20 February 2003 01:43 PM      Profile for evenflow        Edit/Delete Post
True.

It seems to me the use of the term anti-semite is used far too frequently as a tool for political gain or to avoid some obstacle to Israel's foreign policy decisions.

As far as I can decipher, anti-semitic means that a person is hated because they are of Semitic descent. Jewish groups have been most vocal about this term and thus it has gradually come to be commonly accepted to mean hatred of Jewish people exclusively.

Equating any opposition to Israel's policies to hatred and abuse of a person because of the fact they are Jewish is the height of political rhetoric and lends itself to unwarranted acceptance of Israel's national policies. Especially considering their military might and possession of nuclear weapons.


From: learning land | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 20 February 2003 01:48 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Thank God I didnt post this.
From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 20 February 2003 01:49 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Did you read it?
From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
LionKeeper
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3728

posted 20 February 2003 02:22 PM      Profile for LionKeeper     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Man with no Brain
quote:
Some of these left-wing groups are sympathing with real, anti-Semite states like Egypt and Syria.

It’s funny u think Syrians are anti-Semites! Just to fill you in on a little secret… Syrians are Semites as well. They are far from anti-Semites more like anti-Zionists.


From: The Lion's Den | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
darkhorse
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3508

posted 20 February 2003 02:29 PM      Profile for darkhorse     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Are Jews who criticize Israeli policy anti-semetic?

Is Noam Chomsky a self-hating Jew?

Are Brits who criticize Tony Blair anti-British?


From: in transit | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
LionKeeper
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3728

posted 20 February 2003 02:31 PM      Profile for LionKeeper     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Beautiful!
From: The Lion's Den | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
audra trower williams
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2

posted 20 February 2003 02:49 PM      Profile for audra trower williams   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Thanks for having a sense of humour about it, Mishei
From: And I'm a look you in the eye for every bar of the chorus | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
sheep
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2119

posted 20 February 2003 02:49 PM      Profile for sheep     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Are Concordia protesters chanting "Death to Jews" anti-semetic?

Are well known Canadian activists defending said protesters anti-semitic?

The knee-jerk "no, we're leftists, leftists are not anti-semetic, not racist, sexist, etc. etc. etc." reminds me of Christians who believe themselves free of all fault because "Christians don't do those terrible things".

[ 20 February 2003: Message edited by: sheep ]

edited again to fix horrible, horrible grammar

[ 20 February 2003: Message edited by: sheep ]


From: Vancouver | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
Man With No Name
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3771

posted 20 February 2003 02:54 PM      Profile for Man With No Name     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
LionKeeper:

President of Syria delivers anti-semitic speech in front of Pope

Read the above, chuckles.


From: Toronto | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
LionKeeper
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3728

posted 20 February 2003 03:26 PM      Profile for LionKeeper     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Syrian president Bashar al Assad
quote:

"There are many people in this world who are still afraid to even mention the historic facts...and accuse us, the Semites, of being anti-Semitic," ….. “We Are Semites Too”

That above quote was take by Reuters

Here is the articleSyria online

Man With No NameYour article doesn’t come up however; I am very aware of the incident in question… Read this article above, the hyper-link works.


From: The Lion's Den | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
WingNut
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1292

posted 20 February 2003 03:29 PM      Profile for WingNut   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
What about Pipes, sheep? he is embraced by the pro-occupation faction of Israelis and right wingers who love the concept of war and killing. And he preaches hate. Do you object to him? Oh, and did you read the linked article which began this thread?
From: Out There | Registered: Aug 2001  |  IP: Logged
darkhorse
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3508

posted 20 February 2003 03:34 PM      Profile for darkhorse     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
There are racists of various political affiliations. That does not mean 'the Left' are racists or 'the Right' are racists. It means racist are racists.
quote:
Are Concordia protesters chanting "Death to Jews" anti-semetic?
In your phrasing you suggest 'Concordia protesters' are anti-semitic. No. Those chanting "Death to Jews" among the Concordia protesters are anti-semitic. If in fact any such chanting actually happened.

From: in transit | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
sheep
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2119

posted 20 February 2003 03:49 PM      Profile for sheep     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
What about Pipes, sheep? he is embraced by the pro-occupation faction of Israelis and right wingers who love the concept of war and killing. And he preaches hate.

Pipes is a racist ass. I think I understand the context in which he's framing his remarks though, but that's no excuse. Cries of "you have to understand the context" are the first refuge of the racist.

And darkhorse, I only meant to imply the protesters actually making the chant, not the whole of the protesters at Concordia. Perhaps I should have made that more clear.


From: Vancouver | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
lagatta
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2534

posted 20 February 2003 04:56 PM      Profile for lagatta     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I doubt very much that protesters who chant "Death to Jews" are leftists. Not because leftists are "incapable of bad things" but because such chants are typical of extreme Muslim fundamentalists, who are right-wing.
From: Se non ora, quando? | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 20 February 2003 05:36 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
In your phrasing you suggest 'Concordia protesters' are anti-semitic. No. Those chanting "Death to Jews" among the Concordia protesters are anti-semitic. If in fact any such chanting actually happened.
What DH engaging in "Concordia denial"?

From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
darkhorse
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3508

posted 20 February 2003 10:14 PM      Profile for darkhorse     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
What DH engaging in "Concordia denial"?
I express doubt because I've never heard of any protesters chanting "Death to the Jews" in what I've read of the issue.

And you know, there are many Israelis and Jews who deny the dispossesion of Palestinian land and all the colonial cruelties and injustices that go with it. How many Zundels do they number, I wonder?


From: in transit | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 20 February 2003 10:29 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
And you know, there are many Israelis and Jews who deny the dispossesion of Palestinian land and all the colonial cruelties and injustices that go with it. How many Zundels do they number, I wonder? (My emphasis)
This is a stupid and sick comparision. But like I have said in previous threads it is sadly typical of what I have come to expect from DH. Any chance he gets to disparage Jews in any way he grabs with glee. So sad and sadder yet is that people like Smith will probably rag on me for posting this.

From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Moredreads
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3393

posted 21 February 2003 12:10 AM      Profile for Moredreads     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I spent the night listening to an Israeli guy, parrot and Arab accent and make fun of Islam at the computer next to mine for hours on a voice computer chat line. Are you saying there are no racist Israelis, with neo-facist beliefs. If you are I suggest you open your ears.
From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
TommyPaineatWork
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2956

posted 21 February 2003 02:35 AM      Profile for TommyPaineatWork     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Let me rephrase that.

"Is the left anti-semetic?" is the classic unfair question.

[ 21 February 2003: Message edited by: TommyPaineatWork ]


From: London | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mycroft_
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2230

posted 21 February 2003 02:39 AM      Profile for Mycroft_     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
As far as I can decipher, anti-semitic means that a person is hated because they are of Semitic descent. Jewish groups have been most vocal about this term and thus it has gradually come to be commonly accepted to mean hatred of Jewish people exclusively.

Wrong. The term anti-Semitism was coined by German racialist Wilhelm Marrih to give Jew-hatred a pseudo-scientific term to describe it. Frankly, it's quite ironic that you blame Jews for the term and its application.

quote:
What is it we speak of when talking about anti-Semitism? The term itself is a source of some controversy. While the term “Semite” refers to a linguistic group which includes both Arabic and Hebrew, the term “anti-Semitism” was coined by a German Jew-hater, Wilhelm Marr, in the late 19th century. He coined the phrase to refer to a new form of Judeophobia, one which is based on purported racial characteristics. In order to have a term that was easier to pass along than “Judenhass” (hatred of Jews), as well as a new phrase for his theory and one which denied the European heritage of European Jewry, he took what was at the time an obscure linguistic term and applied it to his racial theory of Jews and his ideas as to why they were genetically pre-disposed to threaten European society. The actual term “Semite” is simply a way of grouping speakers of particular languages, including Arabic and Hebrew, and some other, mostly dead, languages. But anti-Semitism was, ironically, coined against Jews alone, despite the fact that, at the time, exceedingly few Jews spoke Hebrew. Even up to today, it has been many centuries since any Semitic language was the primary language of the majority of Jews worldwide. Arabs, on the other hand, are, by definition, Semites, but were beyond the racist consciousness of Marr, who never encountered them.
- quotation from Znet http://www.zmag.org/content/showarticle.cfm?SectionID=22&ItemID=3048

That the word "anti-Semite" is a misnomer is self-evident (and to blame Jews for the misnomer is absurd as it was Jew-haters who coined the word). Nevertheless, to say "I'm not anti-Semitic because I don't hate Arabs" is a dodge.

[ 21 February 2003: Message edited by: Mycroft ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
Smith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3192

posted 21 February 2003 03:06 AM      Profile for Smith     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Not to mention rather irrelevant, as Jews have a long history of being persecuted as Jews, not as "semites" indistinguishable from Arabs.

I don't think that when many prominent Jewish groups and individuals are calling for the same things that the bulk of "the left" is asking for - an end to the illegal occupation - that you can possibly smear the entire left as anti-Semitic. I don't think Amoz Oz or Michael Lerner are anti-Semites. I don't think Gush Shalom is a favourite organization of Zundel.

I think it's nonsense to call leftists, and organizations like Gush Shalom, anti-Israel, much less anti-Semitic. That requires a hell of a lot of logical leaps: one must accept that criticizing a country's policy indicates a desire for that country to stop existing (in which case most of us probably want the USA and Canada to disappear too), and not only that, but that criticizing a country's policy indicates a desire for that country's citizens to stop existing. And there are those who argue that the occupation is necessary to protect Israel, but if you compare Israel's arsenal to the rest of the Middle East's, that's pretty hard to believe.

Apologists for the occupation like to paint this as an issue of Jews vs. others, as a way of silencing their opponents. It's not right. There are plenty of Jews who oppose the occupation.

[ 21 February 2003: Message edited by: Smith ]


From: Muddy York | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 21 February 2003 08:46 AM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Opposing Israeli policies in the disputed territories is in no way antisemitic. Advocating for Israel to remove itselfe from these areas and to work with moderate Palestinians towards a peaceful two-state solution is in no way antisemitic.

To advocate the end of the present Jewish State of Israel is antisemitic. To advocate the use of suicide/homicide bombs to murder Jews and Israelis is antisemitic. Comparing Israeli policy to nazi policy is antisemiitc. Comparing Jews to Zundel and Hitler is antisemitic.


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
unionviller
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 515

posted 21 February 2003 09:41 AM      Profile for unionviller   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I think if you "hate" the state if Israel you are anti-semetic, if you "hate" Jews you are anti-semetic, but if you "hate" Sharon you are not anti-semetic.

If you "hate" Sharon you are doing the following:

1. You are "hating" the Prime Minister of Israel.

2. If you "hate" the Prime Minister of Israel you obviously recognize the legitamacy of Israel as a nation.


From: Beautiful Downtown Unionville | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 21 February 2003 10:58 AM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The way anyone may feel about Sharon, Bush, Chretien or others is perfectly legitimate.
From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
satana
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2798

posted 21 February 2003 11:06 AM      Profile for satana     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
To advocate the end of the present Jewish State of Israel is antisemitic.
How?

From: far away | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Smith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3192

posted 21 February 2003 11:08 AM      Profile for Smith     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
And what does that mean, precisely? I mean, am I allowed to suggest that Arab Israelis should be granted the same rights in Israel as Jewish Israelis, or is that "advocating an end to the State of Israel"?
From: Muddy York | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
sheep
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2119

posted 21 February 2003 11:49 AM      Profile for sheep     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Is Pat Buchanan anti-semetic? Is Pat Buchanan a leftist? I was browsing around this morning and was shocked, really shocked to see how in tune he is with the prevailing opinions on this board.

]

quote:
Israel will not know peace as long as it occupies Arab land.
The US should end foreign aid to Israel and Egypt, which runs to $5 billion yearly, and lay out the elements of an honorable peace:
return of the Golan Heights to Syria, and their demilitarization
Israeli withdrawal from Lebanon, with a right of return if Hezbollah uses the territory for attacks.
Source: “A Republic, Not an Empire,” p.382-3 Oct 9, 1999

Palestine: a flag, a land, a capital in Jerusalem
[An honorable peace with Israel should include]:
a flag and land of their own for the Palestinians
a Vatican enclave-capital in Arab East Jerusalem
any Palestinian state on the West Bank and Gaza should be demilitarized
a permanent commitment to Israel of access to US weapons to enable it to maintain a security edge, with Israeli guarantees of no further technology transfers to China.


[ 21 February 2003: Message edited by: sheep ]


From: Vancouver | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 21 February 2003 11:58 AM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Help:

sheep, this may just be a coincidence, and it may not be your link at all -- but:

When I clicked on that link, I immediately got a Virus Alert, and I now have a quarantined file.

Does anyone know whether this would have come from the site, or must it have come from somewhere else?


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Whazzup?
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1471

posted 21 February 2003 12:00 PM      Profile for Whazzup?     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
IT IS from the site -- sheep, can you delete that link, so that no one else has the same problem? (I know Buchanan's views are toxic -- I just didn't realize they'd be toxic for my computer.)
From: Under the Rubble | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 21 February 2003 12:03 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Forgive my ignorance, but how does that happen?

Surely Buchanan himself wouldn't want to be doing this to readers. So does someone else commit the infecting? How is that done?

I can understand someone opposing Buchanan enough to play hacker games with his site -- but this is a stupid one, if that's what it is.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
darkhorse
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3508

posted 21 February 2003 12:09 PM      Profile for darkhorse     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Comparing Israeli policy to nazi policy is antisemiitc. Comparing Jews to Zundel and Hitler is antisemitic.
Nazi policy at what stage? The early policies of the Nazis towards the Jews are very similar to current Israeli policy towards Israeli-arabs and Palestinians under Occupation. It is a qualitative comparison, not a comparison in scale. And what is anti-semitic about it? Does it mean one hates Jews if one shows that some Israelis are blindly inflicting on others what they once suffered themselves?: destruction of property, intimidation, dispossession and violence. No. It means there is a chain of suffering perpetuated by refusal to look back and see the links. The comparison is a sad one, but it stands. The millions of Palestinian refugees were made so by refugees from Europe who, to this day, refuse to compare their plight. This willful blindness is destructive.

I quote Kim Chernin from Tikkun:

quote:
When we destroy a refugee camp of impoverished Palestinians, this, in our eyes, is a violence purified by our history of persecution. We are puzzled that much of the world doesn't see our situation in the same way.

I think many of us hold this view of purified Jewish violence without being aware of it.

Our sense of victimization as a people works in a dangerous and seditious way against our capacity to know, to recognize, to name and to remember. Since we have adopted ourselves as victims we cannot correctly read our own history let alone our present circumstances. Chernin's essay


Your accusations are mean-spirited and misguided, Mishei.


From: in transit | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Moredreads
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3393

posted 21 February 2003 12:15 PM      Profile for Moredreads     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Comparing Israeli policy to nazi policy is antisemiitc. Comparing Jews to Zundel and Hitler is antisemitic.

Blah, blah, blah. How boring, and also wrong. How dare you take over the language and claim that certain characterizations may be made of some people, but not others.

You could compare Walesa to Adolph Hitler and you would be wrong but it would not be anti-Polish, just because Hitler caused gross harm to poles.

Get real.


From: Canada | Registered: Nov 2002  |  IP: Logged
sheep
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2119

posted 21 February 2003 12:15 PM      Profile for sheep     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Wow, sorry guys

I have to check my computer now. I feel infected already finding I agree with him on something.

[ 21 February 2003: Message edited by: sheep ]


From: Vancouver | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 21 February 2003 12:20 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Good luck, sheep. I hope your computer is ok.
From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
darkhorse
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3508

posted 21 February 2003 12:26 PM      Profile for darkhorse     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
There are unpleasant parallels between Adolph Hitler's ideology and that of the Jewish god, Jahweh. The idea of a 'Chosen race' which should not inter-breed, the incitements to violence against neighboring nations, territorial aggrandizement, etc.
From: in transit | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
lagatta
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2534

posted 21 February 2003 01:22 PM      Profile for lagatta     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Darkhorse, this last one was really creepy.
From: Se non ora, quando? | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
swallow
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2659

posted 21 February 2003 02:06 PM      Profile for swallow     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
This is from Mr. Engler's original article:

quote:
Apologists for American imperialism may believe Israel is a good and loyal ally. But those of us who disagree with U.S. imperialism, also must criticize Israel. That makes us consistent, not anti-Semitic.

It is posed as a direct refutation to the sort of articles Mishei has linked to in the past. Mishei, i'd be curious to hear your response to it. Has the left left behind Israel and degenerated into antisemitism, or is criticism of Israel simply the latest expression of tradtional leftist anti-imperialism?


From: fast-tracked for excommunication | Registered: May 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 21 February 2003 03:20 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I feel Dh has now crossed the line into genuine antisemitism. It is beyond creepy and anyone who now supports him must understand they are supporting an antisemite.
From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mycroft_
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2230

posted 21 February 2003 03:28 PM      Profile for Mycroft_     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:

quote:
------------------------------------------------------------------------
To advocate the end of the present Jewish State of Israel is antisemitic.
------------------------------------------------------------------------
How?
------------------------------------------------------------------------

That is essentially saying that anti-Zionism is the same as anti-Semitism and I think that goes way too far in closing off debate.

I'm not in favour of theocracies or of states where citizenship is in whole or in part defined by ethnicity. Does this mean I'm against the "Jewish state" or the "Jewish nature" of the state of Israel or the end of Israel as a "Jewish state"? I think Israel should be a secular state with separation between state and religion and where people are not excluded on religious or ethnic grounds? Does that mean I'm opposed to the "Jewish state" or wish to end Israel as a "Jewish state", some might say so. Does this mean I'm anti-Semitic?

Frankly, as a socialist, I would like to see the eventual end of the state, particularly the nation-state in favour of some sort of cooperative and democratic world governance. Does this mean I'm an anti-Semite?

[ 21 February 2003: Message edited by: Mycroft ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Feb 2002  |  IP: Logged
darkhorse
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3508

posted 21 February 2003 03:34 PM      Profile for darkhorse     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I feel Dh has now crossed the line into genuine antisemitism. It is beyond creepy and anyone who now supports him must understand they are supporting an antisemite.
Mishei, you are beyond ridiculous. I merely pointed out the similarity of the ideologies and how dangerous they are. It does not make me anti-german or anti-jewish. I fail to see how you draw that conclusion. The Jews suffered at the hands of Nazism - an extreme nationalism. The Palestinians suffer at the hands of Zionism - an extreme nationalism.

Your slander is getting boring.
In fact many of my friends and heroes are Jewish, so what are you talking about?

[ 21 February 2003: Message edited by: darkhorse ]


From: in transit | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 21 February 2003 03:52 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Has the left left behind Israel and degenerated into antisemitism, or is criticism of Israel simply the latest expression of tradtional leftist anti-imperialism?

I have never spoken in terms of the "Left" as a whole.

IMHO, there are elements within the left that has degenerated into antisemitism. Darkhorse (if he is indeed a "leftie") is a prime example of what I mean.

I know it is difficult for some on the left to appreciate the concept of a Jewish state as anything other than a theocracy and all the inherant bleakness associated with such a concept. However for Jews ( including most Jews on the left IMHO)there is no other choice. Our history tragically tells us that no Israel=Jewish tragedy and death. For those who have not had to experience personal Jewish tragedy you may never understand it. So be it.

In this light advocating the end of a "Jewish" state is seen by Jews as an attack on the Jewish people and Judaism. Call us paranoid but Id rather be paranoid than dead.


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
swallow
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2659

posted 21 February 2003 03:53 PM      Profile for swallow     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
DH, read your post again, substitute "the Muslim God" for "the Jewish God" and take several minutes to actually sit and think about the statement. Seriously. It's chilling.

Once the air clears, i still want to know what Mishei thinks about Engler's article.


From: fast-tracked for excommunication | Registered: May 2002  |  IP: Logged
Whazzup?
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1471

posted 21 February 2003 03:55 PM      Profile for Whazzup?     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
In fact many of my friends and heroes are Jewish

I just love this line. Cracks me up every time I hear it.


From: Under the Rubble | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 21 February 2003 03:58 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
DH your post was virulent in its antisemitism. Indeed it could even promote hatred against Jews. I have lodged a complaint with Rabble.
From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
satana
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2798

posted 21 February 2003 04:09 PM      Profile for satana     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I think darkhorse's statement about "the Jewish God" was ignorant. Mishei, it woudl be more constructive if you tried explaining why his statement offends you, instead of just getting him banned.

And swallow, what do you mean by "the Muslim God"?


From: far away | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
writer
editor emeritus
Babbler # 2513

posted 21 February 2003 04:11 PM      Profile for writer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Darkhorse: There are unpleasant parallels between Adolph Hitler's ideology and that of the Jewish god, Jahweh. The idea of a 'Chosen race' which should not inter-breed, the incitements to violence against neighboring nations, territorial aggrandizement, etc.

Deeply disturbing. I do think it crosses babble's policy.

However, the repressive nature of the Israeli state and parallels to Germany aren't unprecedented. In the 1980s, Rick Salutin wrote a piece called "Hitler's Last Laugh," which caused him no end of grief with many fellow Jews and supporters of Israel.

[ 21 February 2003: Message edited by: writer ]


From: tentative | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
satana
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2798

posted 21 February 2003 04:11 PM      Profile for satana     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Mishei, are you saying paranoia justifies racism?
From: far away | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 21 February 2003 04:16 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'm in favour of the two-state solution (that seems to be getting further and further away by the day, sadly), partly for historical and partly for human, psychological reasons -- that is, I don't think that traumatized people on either side should be expected to begin to behave the day after a peace agreement as if they were John Stuart Mill. My main problem with the left-idealist arguments on babble lies there: there's no point in arguing that identity or ethnicity shouldn't matter when, for the time being, it so obviously does.

But Mishei: I can't tell whether you are here being critical specifically of darkhorse and the way he has written, or insisting that any discussion of the tension between democratic principle and the history of the Middle East is out of court -- ? This is an immensely complicated issue: bringing peace to both nations is urgent, I agree, and can't be done solely by relying on democratic ideals in the abstract; but no serious historian, no serious democrat, either, is going to stop pondering the longer-term issues or the longer-term hopes, and I for one hope that such meditations are not going to be forbidden on babble.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
darkhorse
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3508

posted 21 February 2003 04:25 PM      Profile for darkhorse     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
DH your post was virulent in its antisemitism. Indeed it could even promote hatred against Jews. I have lodged a complaint with Rabble.
I specifically refered to the ideology and not the Jewish people. Those who accept the ideology and act on it are dangerous, just as muslim fundamentalists acting and justifying their acts on some of the violent precepts of Islamic scripture are dangerous.

Lodge as many complaints as you like. They remain unsubstantiated.

quote:
I think darkhorse's statement about "the Jewish God" was ignorant.
Exodus 15:3 The Lord is a man of war: the Lord is his name.
Exodus 15:14 Sorrow shall take hold on the inhabitants of Palestine.

[ 21 February 2003: Message edited by: darkhorse ]


From: in transit | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 21 February 2003 05:04 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Mishei, are you saying paranoia justifies racism?
No, Im saying that paranoia is at times well understood amongst jews who have been the historical target of state sponsored murderers for centuries.

However satan why am i not surprised that you asked this question?

Skdadl, attacking Judaism in the evil way that DH did is antisemitic period. What is there to understand. I truly hope that Babble policy kicks in here or in fact it will make a mockery of this board.

Comparing the "Jewish God" to Hitler!!!!!!!...fuck what more do you people need before you are willing to see antisemitism here??????


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 21 February 2003 05:16 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Mishei, please go back and read what I wrote.

I made a clear distinction between two different kinds of writing and discussion.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
darkhorse
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3508

posted 21 February 2003 05:20 PM      Profile for darkhorse     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Comparing the "Jewish God" to Hitler!!!!!!!...fuck what more do you people need before you are willing to see antisemitism here??????
gods are imaginary beings that humans have invested with imaginary power and authority to reinforce their ideologies. I was comparing 'ideologies' if you will go back and read my post, Mishei.

If we are discussing racism, the Zionist ideology is not exempt. It needs also to be discussed, compared and criticized.

[ 21 February 2003: Message edited by: darkhorse ]


From: in transit | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
ronb
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2116

posted 21 February 2003 05:26 PM      Profile for ronb     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Well, much as I kinda sorta know what you're getting at, Judaism and Zionism are not actually synonymous. Religion and ideology may be intertwined in some instances, but this is not a hard and fast rule. Frankly, the more you struggle here, the deeper the into quicksand you go.
From: gone | Registered: Jan 2002  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 21 February 2003 05:27 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
just as muslim fundamentalists acting and justifying their acts on some of the violent precepts of Islamic scripture are dangerous.

darkhorse, I am assuming that your posts about anyone's holy books are going to be censured.

For many months, a number of babblers well read in the Quran have made the point, tirelessly, that selective and twisted readings of that text by politically motivated fanatics bear little connection to the genuine traditions of Islam, and I think that most babblers were guessing that that is true anyway.

People who have posted ill-informed anti-Muslim attacks on babble, mocking Islamic texts and traditions by quoting selectively, have been censured and banned for doing that. That's what you're going to be called on.

Unless you're a Hebrew scholar or a Bible scholar or Northrop Frye, darkhorse, I would really caution you about pretending to be able to characterize such texts from a few, possibly questionably translated, snippets from such enormous, enormously complicated, and enormously important texts.


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
satana
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2798

posted 21 February 2003 05:34 PM      Profile for satana     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
paranoia is understandable. so is racism. but that doesn't answer my question, Mishei. why am i not surprised by that?

[ 21 February 2003: Message edited by: satana ]


From: far away | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Sisyphus
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 1425

posted 21 February 2003 05:38 PM      Profile for Sisyphus     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'll parade my "little learning" again.

Anyone who can read Hans Kung or Martin Buber and find the vengeful God of the Old Testament is clearly delusional. My introduction to the VAST world of thought issuing from the Jewish tradition is the latter.

I only hope I truly understand a little of Buber's insights before I die.

DH, I hear what you're saying, I really do. But I gotta side with caution on this one.

Next thing you know, you'll be trying to start a discussion of modes of discourse on a Babble anti-semitism thread.

Now THERE'S reckless for you!


From: Never Never Land | Registered: Sep 2001  |  IP: Logged
Polunatic
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3278

posted 21 February 2003 05:42 PM      Profile for Polunatic   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
In this light advocating the end of a "Jewish" state is seen by Jews as an attack on the Jewish people and Judaism. Call us paranoid but Id rather be paranoid than dead.

Mishei, I'm glad you've finally acknowledged that you're views are shaped by fear and not logic.

Howver, you are a revisionist. You pick and choose those parts of history that suit you in order to make arguments designed to shut people up. There has always been a debate WITHIN the Jewish community about the existance and nature of a "Jewish State" versus a secular state.

quote:
Creation of the State of Israel

With the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948, the Jewish dimension of the Jewish State became a pressing, practical matter. From the beginning, there were tensions between those who advocated a strict division between religion and state, those who believed halachic Judaism should be the guiding principle of the state and those who sought a middle ground.

ADL History of Israel

While the secularists may have lost the debate, they did (do) in fact exist. You wish they didn't because it makes it so much easier for you to dismiss any criticisms or debate about the notion of a "Jewish state" and Israeli government policy as anti-Semitic.

You should be ashamed of yourself.

[ 21 February 2003: Message edited by: Non-partisan partisan ]


From: middle of nowhere | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Man With No Name
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3771

posted 21 February 2003 05:46 PM      Profile for Man With No Name     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Lionskeeper:

I'm not going to argue that the government of Syria have been and are very hostile to Israel and Judaism. If you read any history books you will realize I am correct.


From: Toronto | Registered: Feb 2003  |  IP: Logged
skdadl
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 478

posted 21 February 2003 05:59 PM      Profile for skdadl     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Next thing you know, you'll be trying to start a discussion of modes of discourse on a Babble anti-semitism thread.

Now THERE'S reckless for you!


IMHO, of course, Sisyphus dear, that would be a breakthrough to intelligent discussion rather than mere Aristotelian name-calling.

Not that anyone is going to believe me, of course. But we soldier on. Where is Trespasser, anyway?


From: gone | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
writer
editor emeritus
Babbler # 2513

posted 21 February 2003 06:16 PM      Profile for writer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
I truly hope that Babble policy kicks in here or in fact it will make a mockery of this board.

Comparing the "Jewish God" to Hitler!!!!!!!...fuck what more do you people need before you are willing to see antisemitism here??????


Mishei: audra is the moderator. audra works part-time. I know waiting can be hard sometimes, but rabble can't afford to have people moderating this board 24/7.

And who are "you people"? A number of us have expressed deep concern about darkhorse's post. Why do you set yourself up as the lone voice of reason? It's insulting.


From: tentative | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
darkhorse
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3508

posted 21 February 2003 06:26 PM      Profile for darkhorse     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
darkhorse, I am assuming that your posts about anyone's holy books are going to be censured.
Why?
And Skdadl, as for the rest of your quote it relates to nothing I've said. A text is a text, "to be read like any other", as Coleridge says of the Bible. No one is presuming to be a scholar, and I have never blasted Islam or Judaism, I have spoken only of Jahweh and characteristics of his ideology. We can discuss it or we can cry 'Mommy' like Mishei does.

If anyone has read Carl Jung's Answer to Job, you will find many observations on Jahweh as a military god.

I still stand by the post in question.

quote:
Anyone who can read Hans Kung or Martin Buber and find the vengeful God of the Old Testament is clearly delusional.
No. The vengeful god exists as an aspect of Jahweh. It's there, you can't deny it. Even Moses says to him "Turn from thy fierce wrath and repent of this evil against thy people."(Ex. 32:12) I've read Buber, and love 'I and Thou' - it's a masterpiece, but much of his exegesis of the old testament is one-sided or rather it emphasizes the moral and relational aspects of the covenant at the expense of others. What I find interesting in the above bit of scripture, is that man becomes the conscience of an otherwise immoderate god.

[ 21 February 2003: Message edited by: darkhorse ]


From: in transit | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
swallow
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2659

posted 21 February 2003 06:56 PM      Profile for swallow     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
And swallow, what do you mean by "the Muslim God"?

Precisely what skdadl said so much better:

quote:
People who have posted ill-informed anti-Muslim attacks on babble, mocking Islamic texts and traditions by quoting selectively, have been censured and banned for doing that. That's what you're going to be called on.

Of course i think that the God in Jewish, Christian, and Muslim scriptures is the same person/force/whatever. And attacking a religion is not the same as attacking an ideology. Not even close to the same. Attacking a religion as inherently violent crosses any number of lines.

On the other hand, criticizing a state or an empire is not IMHO the same as attacking the faith of its people. And that's Yves Engler's point of course.


From: fast-tracked for excommunication | Registered: May 2002  |  IP: Logged
Polunatic
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3278

posted 21 February 2003 07:04 PM      Profile for Polunatic   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
attacking a religion is not the same as attacking an ideology

On this logic, atheists must not be welcome at Babble if they attempt to argue that there is no such thing as God because that would offend those who believe in God.

Marx would have been banned for saying that "religion is the opiate of the masses". That's preposterous and I can't imagine it to be Rabble's policy.

Imagine this discussion 200 or 300 years ago. Would there have really been a distinction between religion and ideology? Or religion and faith? Then again, I would have been a dead heretic long ago.

[ 21 February 2003: Message edited by: Non-partisan partisan ]


From: middle of nowhere | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
darkhorse
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3508

posted 21 February 2003 07:15 PM      Profile for darkhorse     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
On this logic, atheists must not be welcome at Babble if they attempt to argue that there is no such thing as God because that would offend those who believe in God.
Thank you, NPP. Supernatural beliefs are fine in themselves, but they shouldn't be used to dismiss those who don't subscribe. Or penalize those who dare to prod at what some consider 'holy' and therefore off limits. That's silly.

From: in transit | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 21 February 2003 07:26 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
There are numerous injunctions in the Bible's Old Testament which indicate that God clearly has designated the Hebrew tribes to be ascendant in the area of Israel. However, those Biblical phrases can be evaluated on their own merits as to the worthiness of their basis as guiding principles of a religion without necessarily resorting to the Hitler comparison.

Having said that, I now turn to the question of atheism.

Is an atheist "anti-Semitic" if he states quite simply that he does not acknowledge the validity of a claim to land based on a sole reference to religious literature as the basis for the claim?

After all, I am an atheist. I do not believe in God. I believe the Bible is a convenient fiction, full of stories that may entertain you or shock you, but they are not proof of the existence of a supreme being or a supernatural plane of existence.

I therefore cannot accept a story as the basis of an outright claim over land.

It would be like me writing a book saying the Great Big Wheat Stalk in the sky said I could own Saskatchewan.

Now any person in their right mind would justifiably think I was a tad bonkers.

Ah, but the Bible is 2000 years old.

So, does that mean if I wrote, in old German, that the Great Big Wheat Stalk in the sky said I could own Saskatchewan, that my claim would be accepted? Hardly. People would correctly point out that nobody else's religion 2000 years ago had any wheat stalk in it, and my claim was of little merit.

Please note that my rejection of the religious basis for a claim over land does not equate to my rejection of the reality that Israel is where it is and the people who live in it are living there right here and now.


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
swallow
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2659

posted 21 February 2003 07:46 PM      Profile for swallow     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Being atheist, no problem. "Your religion is inherently violent" is equivalent to "your people are inherently violent" in my mind. That sounds like a policy violation.

Maybe religion is the wrong word, but i think there was a comment that smeared an identifiable group, one generally identified by its religion. But i guess Audra will rule on this soon enough.

Is religion the same as ideology? It seems to me that there are Christian socialists, Christian anarchists, Christian conservatives and Christian everything else, so the categories cut across each other. Do Jerry Falwell and Hans Kung have the same ideology? Are Gandhi and L.K. Advani fellow travellers?


From: fast-tracked for excommunication | Registered: May 2002  |  IP: Logged
Polunatic
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3278

posted 21 February 2003 08:06 PM      Profile for Polunatic   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Being atheist, no problem. "Your religion is inherently violent" is equivalent to "your people are inherently violent" in my mind. That sounds like a policy violation.

OK, how about, "Historically, untold amounts of war, violence and human suffering have been inflicted upon people in the name of ___________" (fill in the blank with the obvious choices)?

Or how about, "Your religion is not inherently violent, it's just been interpreted and applied that way by religious and political leaders for centuries forcing adherents to engage in war, violence and untold human suffering"?

BTW, I have a lot of respect for religious leaders and followers today who are taking strong stands for peace and social justice.

[ 21 February 2003: Message edited by: Non-partisan partisan ]


From: middle of nowhere | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Marx
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3606

posted 21 February 2003 08:15 PM      Profile for Marx     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Religion is the opiate of the masses!
From: we may not convince you, but we'll convince your children | Registered: Jan 2003  |  IP: Logged
swallow
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2659

posted 21 February 2003 08:17 PM      Profile for swallow     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yeah, it would be hard to disagree with any of those statements NPP. Qualifiers like "in the name of" avoid the generalization and the smear.

[ 21 February 2003: Message edited by: swallow ]


From: fast-tracked for excommunication | Registered: May 2002  |  IP: Logged
darkhorse
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3508

posted 21 February 2003 08:29 PM      Profile for darkhorse     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
It seems the infamous post that started all this has been read very haphazardly. Though some of you insist otherwise, I have nowhere bashed the religion of Judaism or the Jewish people. If you think I have, cite the offending words.

As to making the comparison, I wished to point to the danger of an ideology carried to its limits. Hitler was appropriate. As to Jahweh, I do not see why there should be any uproar over criticisms of an imaginary being. In a subsequent post I showed how Moses, as lead representative of the Israelites, actually resisted Yahweh's power-fetish and berated his god. I think this is interesting because it shows the force of human conscience rebelling against blind ideology. It is an example to learn from in the current middle eastern crisis.


From: in transit | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mimichekele2
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3232

posted 21 February 2003 08:59 PM      Profile for Mimichekele2        Edit/Delete Post
May I respectfully point out that the Jewish God is also the God of all Christians and of all Muslims. That makes a little more than 2 billion of us who (at least officially are supposed to) worship this Hitler-like beast.

The Jewish God is also the God of Moses, the first symbol of human liberation (in the form of the Exodus story - Michael Walzer and many other philosophers have tried to argue that the Moses narrative is one of the most important roots of political radicalism).

The Jewish God is the God of the Prophets, and therefore the God of social justice and therefore the inspiration for most of our ideas of modern politics - the Protestant Reformation and its ideals of personal freedom of conscience are impossible without the Jewish God. Likewise, the Prophetic tradition of the Jewish God flows directly into Marx's thought and into the thought of ALL modern forms of democratic socialism, social democracy and I guess even anarchism.

That is a lot of people to insult DarkHorse.

One can make a theological argument I suppose that the remarks only attack "religion" and imaginary beings.

Unfortunately, the remarks implied how Jews (and only Jews, not Christians or Moslems who share the exact same God) worship and have worshipped for the better part of 3,000 years an entity that is no better than a genocidal Jew killer like Hitler, which most of us here can hopefully recognize is perhaps one of the most insulting things one can say to Jews, whether religious or secular.

I am assuming you did not intend this.

Nonetheless I can only add my voice to those who found the remarks very creepy and, I would add, frightening in their unintended implications.

P.S. "Some of my best friends and heroes" are fascist anti-Semites. ==> to be clear, this is the so-called irony icon, to mean an attempt at a joke, OK? So no, I am not calling anyone an anti-Semite, OK?

[ 21 February 2003: Message edited by: Mimichekele2 ]


From: More lawyers, fewer bricks! | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 22 February 2003 09:41 AM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
There has always been a debate WITHIN the Jewish community about the existance and nature of a "Jewish State" versus a secular state.

I have never denied this debate exists. However secularits are very much in the minority. Indeed virtually every political party in Israel accepts and supports the Jewish nature of Israel. The real debate is how much religion will be infused within the polity of the state.

quote:
And who are "you people"? A number of us have expressed deep concern about darkhorse's post. Why do you set yourself up as the lone voice of reason? It's insulting.


Writer you are correct only to a point. Many have urged "caution". Others feel uncomfortable and have expressed "concern" asking Darkhorse to stop. I believe I have been the only one to have recognized and called Darkhorse's comments exactly what they are...antisemitism. And the fact that he has continued despite your warnings and expressions of concern clearly proves IMHO that Darkhorse has truly shown his "dark" side and is an antisemite. If the moderator (and I understand her time constraints so I patiently await her decision) allows it to continue I hold that Babble's policy will be a sham.

[ 22 February 2003: Message edited by: Mishei ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
lagatta
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2534

posted 22 February 2003 10:04 AM      Profile for lagatta     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Actually I think Mimi's comment was an excellent explanation as to why darkhorse's comment was offensive, even to people (Jewish or not) who are neither religious nor Zionist.

It was also an excellent summary of the complex and contradictory legacy of Abrahamic monotheism.


From: Se non ora, quando? | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
writer
editor emeritus
Babbler # 2513

posted 22 February 2003 10:06 AM      Profile for writer     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Yes, Mimi, thanks so much for the context.
From: tentative | Registered: Apr 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 22 February 2003 11:02 AM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I too join in the commendations of Mimi's piece. However, I would add that if darkhorse would accept the expressions of concern I could agree that his offence was "unintended". The fact that he strongly defends his offensive and insulting post has led me to my conclusion that it was in fact intended as antisemitic.
From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
darkhorse
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3508

posted 22 February 2003 11:03 AM      Profile for darkhorse     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
May I respectfully point out that the Jewish God is also the God of all Christians and of all Muslims.
May I Respectfully point out that for all that, he is still an imaginary being.
quote:
The Jewish God is the God of the Prophets, and therefore the God of social justice and therefore the inspiration for most of our ideas of modern politics
You can invest this god with as many links and therefores as you like... he is still an imaginary being until proven otherwise. And in any case, are you suggesting that because of the sheer number of his followers, he is beyond criticism?
quote:
an entity that is no better than a genocidal Jew killer like Hitler
That is your extrapolation. I said there were some ideological parallels which I found unpleasant. That is all.
quote:
I believe I have been the only one to have recognized and called Darkhorse's comments exactly what they are...antisemitism
You are very liberal with that term Mishei. I am the one who should complain to the moderator for you persistant leveling of abuse and slander. Obviously, you cannot deal rationaly with any criticism of any aspect of Israel.

And I will say it again: my post expressed concern for this ideology of a 'chosen race' hand-selected by the only legitimate deity and told it has exclusive right to a 'covenant Land' and visions of a grand and powerful destiny. There are components of the Israeli government that actually believe all this stuff. Israel has a nuclear arsenal. Are my fears unjustified?

quote:
Mimi's comment was an excellent explanation as to why darkhorse's comment was offensive, even to people (Jewish or not) who are neither religious nor Zionist.
I seem to remember an author who dared to suggest a diabolical aspect to the Koran. His name is Salmun Rushdie and his death sentence has recently been renewed.

And again, those who take offence at the comparison of an imaginary being to Hitler or the Devil - whether they number half the world, that is not my fault, nor Mr. Rushdie's. No beings, real or imaginary, are, by sheer force of popularity, somehow exempt from criticism.


From: in transit | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Smith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3192

posted 22 February 2003 11:10 AM      Profile for Smith     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
The book of Joshua left me reeling.

This holy genocide, this vicious and absolute fanaticism, is deep within all three religions - Christianity, Judaism, Islam - and it is there, always, ready to be called upon. It's in the rifle-toting settlers in the West Bank; it's in the American student wearing a T-shirt with a picture of the Middle East that says "KILL THEM ALL"; it's in the "soldiers" of Al Qaeda. Its spirit helps drive the Israel-Palestine conflict. It is an evil part of human nature and an evil part of religion.

From Chernin's article:

quote:
Though we rarely admit it, the Torah is full of ancient stories marked by tribal violence done in the name of Jehovah. We know the story of Elijah wrangling with the prophets of Baal on Mt. Carmel. The prophet wins a clear victory for Jehovah over the Canaanite gods. We know, but don't make much of the fact as we retell the story, that after Elijah won the contest on Jehovah's behalf he took the prophets of Baal down to the brook Kishon and slew them there. All 450 of them. I have not heard of or read a midrash that elaborates this massacre.

I recently wrote an article about the traces of Goddess worship in the Torah. When I cited this example of Elijah and prophets, my three editors, all intelligent and well-educated Jewish women, were uneasily eager to have me supply a footnote for this contentious assertion. They were as surprised as I initially had been to discover that the account of this violence was in the Torah itself. And yet they had certainly read Kings II.

In a similar vein: We celebrate the military victories of Joshua. But do we really take in what they involved? "Joshua, and all Israel with him, went on up from Elon to Hebron. They attacked it, took it and struck it with the edge of the sword, with its king, all the places belonging to it and every living creature in it (my italics, Josh. 10:37)." I have yet to hear a rabbi help us imagine this event in which women and children, the very young and the very old, are put to the sword.


Or a minister, or a priest, as far as I know.

quote:

Our God is a God of many changes. The old warrior God who has had nothing new to say for thousands of years has been able, over time, to unfold aspects of Himself our Israelite ancestors would have found surprising. In talmudic thought the war-like, conquering diety evolves into a God of profound ethical concerns. He has revealed the Shechinah, his female, compassionate side, who comes to her children on the Sabbath and goes out with us into exile. She has, along the way, shown herself to be in love with a good story. She inspires midrashim, cherishing them as much as stories and teachings regarded as more sacred. She rejoices as women speak to her through their own prayers and rituals in settings that for too long excluded women. She is a God of perpetual unfolding; we, her people, inherit a tradition that asks for and imposes on us the work of continual renewal. Compassion, service, and a concern for justice are the imperative expressions of our divine worship.

This is written from a Jewish perspective, but you could of course come up with equivalents in Christian and Muslim thought. But, always, one must acknowledge that the capability for violence is there.

darkhorse, I agree that some of the early scriptures are far from humanistic, but that aspect of God is not unique to Judaism at all.

Mishei, I absolutely do not accept "we feel threatened" as a reason to threaten, victimize and subjugate other people. If you can have a Jewish State that doesn't do that, fine. If you can't, then it is not acceptable. And Israel's current and past behaviour towards Muslim Arabs is not acceptable.

No history of persecution can justify more persecution. "Never again." Remember.

quote:
And I will say it again: my post expressed concern for this ideology of a 'chosen race' hand-selected by the only legitimate deity and told it has exclusive right to a 'covenant Land' and visions of a grand and powerful destiny. There are components of the Israeli government that actually believe all this stuff. Israel has a nuclear arsenal. Are my fears unjustified?

I agree - this is not unique to Israel, either, but I agree. The notion of a race "chosen" for exclusive privileges is always dangerous, no matter where it's from.

That said, I don't believe that is how a Jewish scholar would read it, or how the majority of Jews would read it, and I don't believe that fundamentalist fanatics have the intentions of the scripture right, in any religion. Unfortunately, in Israel as in the US and elsewhere, the fundamentalist fanatics have been getting more than their share of time and attention.

[ 22 February 2003: Message edited by: Smith ]


From: Muddy York | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
audra trower williams
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2

posted 22 February 2003 12:25 PM      Profile for audra trower williams   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Sorry, everyone, I just got this now. You probably noticed the rabble server was down for a while.

Anyway, that's the end of darkhorse.


From: And I'm a look you in the eye for every bar of the chorus | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged
swallow
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2659

posted 22 February 2003 01:02 PM      Profile for swallow     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
So back to Engler maybe? I think his point that rising criticism of Israel's actions is in the long traditional of anti-imperialism is one that deserves a response from those who call this rising criticism "antisemitism." And i think the reaction on this thread has shown that people who make antisemitic remarks will be called on them.
From: fast-tracked for excommunication | Registered: May 2002  |  IP: Logged
satana
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2798

posted 22 February 2003 01:24 PM      Profile for satana     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I'd just like to know, did darkhorse recieve a warning before being banned? and how for long will s/he be banned?
From: far away | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
CyberNomad
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2926

posted 22 February 2003 01:25 PM      Profile for CyberNomad     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
[Why is this topic in the middle east? Anti-semites are everywhere! Kind of fun reading their contorted denials.]
Smith said:
quote:
The book of Joshua left me reeling.
This holy genocide, this vicious and absolute fanaticism, is deep within all three religions - Christianity, Judaism, Islam - and it is there, always, ready to be called upon. It's in the rifle-toting settlers in the West Bank; it's in the American student wearing a T-shirt with a picture of the Middle East that says "KILL THEM ALL"; it's in the "soldiers" of Al Qaeda. Its spirit helps drive the Israel-Palestine conflict. It is an evil part of human nature and an evil part of religion.

She forgot the martyrs, a.k.a. suicide-bombers. (I will not ask why?) BTW, has anyone heard the rumour that the Pope is professing to be non-Catholic?

From: St. Catharines ON | Registered: Aug 2002  |  IP: Logged
rbil
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 582

posted 22 February 2003 02:09 PM      Profile for rbil     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Anyway, that's the end of darkhorse.

What does this mean? If it means he's been banned, I for one would like to know why? I think I read every posting he made in this thread and cannot see what would cause the moderator to ban him. I think there should be some explanation from the moderator of this forum, if for no other reason than to forewarn the rest of us as to what is "acceptable" around here.


From: IRC: irc.bcwireless.net JOIN: #linuxtalk | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Michelle
Moderator
Babbler # 560

posted 22 February 2003 03:37 PM      Profile for Michelle   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Claiming that the Jewish religion and Hitler's ideology are similar IS hateful. Religions grow and change, and from what I've read, Judaism has a rich tradition of continuing interpretation of age-old scriptures. It is not fair, and it's very hurtful, to make a sweeping generalization based on your own literalist interpretation of their scripture about what Jews believe and what their ideology is, and then to compare that to Nazi ideology.

I, for one, was disgusted by it, and thought Audra quite justified in her actions. It's so easy to bitch and complain about the work someone like Audra does, isn't it?


From: I've got a fever, and the only prescription is more cowbell. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 22 February 2003 03:55 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Michelle...thank you. Your words resonate with many and have touched me deeply.

Audra there are many here who support your action. I am frankly surprised at those who are taking issue with you on Darkhoses' being banned. If anything was pretty clear his words were sadly so. Those who would support him I can only believe are of the same mind.


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
satana
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2798

posted 22 February 2003 04:11 PM      Profile for satana     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
"those"? plural? who are you talking about?
From: far away | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 22 February 2003 04:13 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Satan did you support Darkhorses' post? If so count yourself in
From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
satana
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2798

posted 22 February 2003 04:18 PM      Profile for satana     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
No I didn't. Read what I've posted on this thread. And the name is "satana". SA-TA-NA.
From: far away | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
rbil
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 582

posted 22 February 2003 05:17 PM      Profile for rbil     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Claiming that the Jewish religion and Hitler's ideology are similar IS hateful.

Michelle, I sure must be missing this post and I've looked and looked to find out what all the condemnation was about. Could you quote it for me please? I never saw him doing that in any post he made in this thread.

Thanks


From: IRC: irc.bcwireless.net JOIN: #linuxtalk | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
orpheus
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3513

posted 22 February 2003 05:18 PM      Profile for orpheus        Edit/Delete Post
quote:
Claiming that the Jewish religion and Hitler's ideology are similar IS hateful. ...to make a sweeping generalization based on your own literalist interpretation of their scripture about what Jews believe and what their ideology is, and then to compare that to Nazi ideology.
I've read the thread and there is a lot of distortion going on here. As far as I can make out, DH wasn't attacking the Jewish religion, but was pretty specific and said 'Jahweh'. He gave some examples. They were disconcerting, but just what are the rules here? Is Theology off limits at Rabble? This seems to me a pretty fair defence:
quote:
And I will say it again: my post expressed concern for this ideology of a 'chosen race' hand-selected by the only legitimate deity and told it has exclusive right to a 'covenant Land' and visions of a grand and powerful destiny. There are components of the Israeli government that actually believe all this stuff. Israel has a nuclear arsenal. Are my fears unjustified?
It merits debate, ...but banning? And no explaination? This sets a bad precedent. I'm gonna quit this place while I'm ahead.

From: Seoul | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 22 February 2003 07:47 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
I do not like repeating a slander but for those who still dont get it:

DH claimed that there were parallels between Adolph HITLER and the Jewish God Jahweh. What is it that some of you dont get? Comparing Jewish belief and the Jewish God to the most evil entity humankind has ever known is hateful beyond understanding.

Certainly one can engage in theological debate without resorting to hatemongering. And frankly Orpheus and rbil if you dont get it (or anyone else for that matter) you are antisemitic. Can I be any more clear?

[ 22 February 2003: Message edited by: Mishei ]


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Mimichekele2
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3232

posted 22 February 2003 08:27 PM      Profile for Mimichekele2        Edit/Delete Post
Not to get too theological here, but there is no such concept in any Jewish texts about a "chosen race".

There is a notion of a "chosen people" but theologically it clearly refers to obligations the ancient Hebrews had to obey various commandments in exchange for which "God" would protect them and "lead" them to a "promised land".

The emphasis was on obedience to the commandments. Whenever the ancient Hebrews disobeyed the commandments, God punished them with war, invasion, foreign occupation, exile, the destruction of their places of worship and even genocide (where are the ten lost tribes - wiped off the planet).

Another thing. Again, not to get too theological and remember I am not Jewish so check this out for yourself in your local library, but the Ancient Testament God of vengeance (book of Joshua etc.) is not the same God as the God of modern Judaism, modern Judaism being based on a combination of the Torah (the Jewish Bible), the Prophets and what is called the Talmud (commentaries by rabbis in the 8-10 centuries after the Old Testament was completed).

To take something from the Ancient Testament as the core of Judaism is considered to be a form of theological heresy. It is called Karaism and the Karaites were expelled from Judaism sometime in the tenth or eleventh century if my memory serves me right.

Modern Judaism, AKA rabbinical Judaism, requires that "sacred texts" like Torah and Prophets be read through the prism of rationalistic commentary based on the Talmud.

Example: the famous story of an eye for an eye a tooth for a tooth. Sounds nasty and barbaric and it is. No modern Jewish theologian I have ever heard of endorses it. In fact, as read through the prism of them Talmud, the "eye for eye toth for a tooth" has come to be reinterpreted by rabbinical scholars as being an argument against corporal punishment and against the death penalty and for what we moderns call leniency and proportionality in sentencing (the notion of proportionality is modern it's even in our Charter). I'll spare you the details because what I understand of Talmudic reasoning seems quite sophisticated and contorted at times (but hey my family is full of lawyers and litigators so I'm kind of used to contorted justifications).

All this to say that:

a) attacks on Judaism have been a hallmark of anti-Semitism for a long time

b) there has never been a concept of a "chosen race". The accusation that Judaism has such a notion is another hallmark of modern European anti-Semitism and should be known to anyone familiar with classic texts of political anti-Semitism

c) references to barbaric passages in the Ancient Testament are not very useful in interpreting the ideas of Judaism because the contents of the Ancient Testament have been theologically superseded and reworked in all forms of modern Judaic thinking in light of the Talmud.

Jewish people on Babble are welcome to correct any factual errors in the above

[ 22 February 2003: Message edited by: Mimichekele2 ]


From: More lawyers, fewer bricks! | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
DrConway
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 490

posted 22 February 2003 08:56 PM      Profile for DrConway     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
b) there has never been a concept of a "chosen race". The accusation that Judaism has such a notion is another hallmark of modern European anti-Semitism and should be known to anyone familiar with classic texts of political anti-Semitism

That may be all well and good in theory, but I am prepared to submit that as a person who never ceases to be absolutely fascinated with how well religion can stop a working mind in its tracks, I have become rather a jaundiced viewer of the supposed rationality of interpretation of religious texts and so I would not be surprised if a minority of Jewish Fundamentalists did indeed take the notion of being a chosen people to an obviously erroneous conclusion that being chosen connotes being superior.


From: You shall not side with the great against the powerless. | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 22 February 2003 08:56 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Mimi as I was preparing my response to the "chosen people" concept your wonderfully simple explanation appeared. Your interpretation is sound and even rabbinical.

I hope this puts to rest the issues raised here as to why DH was removed from the Room.


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
orpheus
recent-rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3513

posted 22 February 2003 09:17 PM      Profile for orpheus        Edit/Delete Post
I agree with Moredreads.
quote:
Blah, blah, blah. How boring, and also wrong. How dare you take over the language and claim that certain characterizations may be made of some people, but not others.

You could compare Walesa to Adolph Hitler and you would be wrong but it would not be anti-Polish, just because Hitler caused gross harm to poles.

Get real.


DH may be wrong but anti-semitic? come on... I guess Herta Däubler-Gmelin, the German justice minister who compared the U.S. president's policies to Hitler's, would also be banned from this site, right? Because clearly, she hates all americans!
quote:
DH claimed that there were parallels between Adolph HITLER and the Jewish God Jahweh. What is it that some of you dont get? Comparing Jewish belief and the Jewish God to the most evil entity humankind has ever known is hateful beyond understanding.
You are spinning it. DH claimed there were parallels between the ideologies of ... -that means parallels in thought, not in action or personality. And either way, I don't get what the big deal is, if you compare Hitler to Scooby-Doo or Jehova. "See the violence inheriting the system!" Babble's gone Orwellian. Adios.

From: Seoul | Registered: Dec 2002  |  IP: Logged
rbil
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 582

posted 22 February 2003 09:40 PM      Profile for rbil     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
And frankly Orpheus and rbil if you dont get it (or anyone else for that matter) you are antisemitic. Can I be any more clear?

Frankly, I've seen you banter around that charge of antisemiticism every time you've gotten into a debate with anyone on middle east issues. Anyone who reads this WHOLE thread has to recognize that DH quite eloquently and correctly presented his argument and made it clear, as far as I'm concerned, that he is not a racist. And neither am I, btw.

It looks to me like DH was moderated out of here more from your rantings than anything else. That one sentence, when taken out of context of his WHOLE argument does not make him a racist, although that charge seems to be the only way you ever try to defend your position around here. I'm still going to wait and get an explanation from the moderator before I decide whether to abandon Babble or not. I'm hoping this whole issue of banning DH is properly reviewed and assessed on the basis of all his postings in this thread and maybe even looking at other threads in this forum in which he participated. I think his contribution to discussions on Babble have been positive and I never got the impression that he is a racist. He and I are certainly anti-Zionist, but I've seen this being equated with anti-semitism, which is just bs.


From: IRC: irc.bcwireless.net JOIN: #linuxtalk | Registered: May 2001  |  IP: Logged
Mishei
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2785

posted 22 February 2003 10:17 PM      Profile for Mishei     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
quote:
It looks to me like DH was moderated out of here more from your rantings than anything else.

Shame on both orpheus and rbil. Now you make accusations of what a "Jewish conspiracy" i cooked up with Audra to bounce DH. You guys are too much. In my almost 10 months on Rabble I have labeled only one person here an antisemite till yesterday and that was DH. Your lonely protestations notwithstanding (you are alone people) DH was eloquent in his hate. You two are as eloquent in your support of his hate.

Auudra is objective and fair. She takes orders from no one. The fact that you are alleging this conspiracy is more proof in my books of your utter moral failure.


From: Toronto | Registered: Jun 2002  |  IP: Logged
Smith
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 3192

posted 23 February 2003 12:55 AM      Profile for Smith     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
Jewish conspiracy? What?

Uh, Mishei, conspiracy requires more than one person. If you, a Jewish person, rant and rave to get something done, that is not a conspiracy. That is just you. NO ONE mentioned or even hinted at conspiracy AT ALL, let alone "Jewish conspiracy," except you.

I would sympathize with your position a lot more if you would at least PRETEND to stick to the facts.

quote:
She forgot the martyrs, a.k.a. suicide-bombers. (I will not ask why?)

Because I do not believe their motivation is exclusively or even primarily religious, and because I honestly do not understand them or what they hope to achieve by blowing themselves up; it makes no sense to me.

[ 23 February 2003: Message edited by: Smith ]


From: Muddy York | Registered: Oct 2002  |  IP: Logged
audra trower williams
rabble-rouser
Babbler # 2

posted 23 February 2003 01:12 AM      Profile for audra trower williams   Author's Homepage     Send New Private Message      Edit/Delete Post
surely this has gone on long enough.
From: And I'm a look you in the eye for every bar of the chorus | Registered: Apr 2001  |  IP: Logged

All times are Pacific Time  

   Open Topic    Move Topic    Delete Topic next oldest topic   next newest topic
Hop To:

Contact Us | rabble.ca | Policy Statement

Copyright 2001-2008 rabble.ca