Roadtoad
Bufo Caminus Inedibilis
Seems pretty odd to me that in Islam, you only get your 72 virgins if you kill a bunch of innocent people. Not if you, say, develop a treatment for Cancer, or perhaps rescue a group of people in danger.
Sounds like that would invalidate the whole enterprise right there.
Sounds like that would invalidate the whole enterprise right there.
Roadtoad said:
I think it's the other way around: antisemites don't flock to progressive movements, it's the nature of such movements that makes (some) people antisemites.
What happens is this: idealistic movements tend to, sooner or later, divide the world into "us-vs.-them" mentality, with all light and truth on "our" side and all darkness and evil on "their" side. And when it comes to identifying "them", those who disagree with your deepst beliefs just to spite you, jews are always a prime target.
Virtually all idealistic or "total" movements made the jews their scapegoats at some point. For the Communists, it was the "jewish financiers"; for the Nazis, the "jewish bolsheviks"; for the christians, it's the jewish "christ-killer", etc.
Now that the most common idealistic movement is the so-called "anti-racist" and "anti-imperialist" one, it is not surprising that they scapegoat the "racist" or "imperialist" jew (or, as they put it now, "zionist").
Skeptic said:
The second option. I'm probably the most conservative of all my friends (which, you probably wouldn't guess to look at me, with multiple piercings and purple hair). But they're all about the 'zionist' conspiracies and the like.
Although, having answered that question, it brings to mind something my dad always says (not sure where he got it from), "If you're 20, and not a socialist, you have no heart. If you're 50 and still a socialist, you have no brain".
epepke
Philosopher
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2003
- Messages
- 9,264
Jas said:
It's usually "30 and still a socialist." I'll stick to that one, as I'm not 50 yet.
I like extending proverb in quasi-syllogism. Another proverb is "Life is a tragedy to those who feel and a comedy to those who think." So I conclude that in order to have a heart and a brain, one must have a really sick sense of humor. Fortunately, I have found this part easy.
epepke
Philosopher
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2003
- Messages
- 9,264
Mycroft said:
Of course, many of said people will insist, quite vocally, that they are not really anti-Semitic or anti-Jew, but that they are really anti-Zionism or anti-Israel.
I had an interesting experience about this on another site. (http://www.kuro5hin.org) I pointed out the instance in Canada where a college student wearing Star-of-David earrings who went to a rally against the war on Iraq was insulted by the crowd, called a "murderer" and so on, simply because of the earrings.
I expected to hear the quite reasonable excuses that I might produce, that these were just college kids and therefore stupid, that they may have made unwarranted assumptions about the wearer of the earrings, and so on.
The actual reaction, which nobody but me argued with, took me somewhat aback. It started with sarcasm and took a few exchanges for me to understand, but it seems to be the idea that since the Star of David is a device used in the Israeli flag, that the symbol itself had been "politicized," and therefore that displaying the symbol in any context whatsoever is inherently pro-Zionist and pro-Israeli, and therefore inherently offensive.
Now, there doesn't seem to be more than a hairsbreadth of difference between declaring the Star of David a pro-Zionist political symbol and therefore inherently offensive and just coming right out and saying that just being a kike is an inherent affront.
In the mean time, a few days ago when the shot Palestinian kid was presented as having been shot by Israelis, which the Israelis didn't even fire a shot, on ABC news, in the background during a few frames, a swastika was clearly painted on the wall.
I suppose that this isn't a "politicized" symbol.
Now, there doesn't seem to be more than a hairsbreadth of difference between declaring the Star of David a pro-Zionist political symbol and therefore inherently offensive and just coming right out and saying that just being a kike is an inherent affront.
It is here that the so-called "anti-zionist" jews like Chomsky and Finkelstein come in so handy to the antisemites. They provide the necessary "hairsbreadth": "but I am not REALLY an antisemite, why, so-and-so is a jew and he agrees with me!"
on ABC news, in the background during a few frames, a swastika was clearly painted on the wall.
I suppose that this isn't a "politicized" symbol.
For many Palestinians, Hitler is a hero to be emulated. Holocaust denial (and worse, justification) is rife in what passes for "education" in the Palestinian authority.
The "moderate" PA prime minister who Arafat caused to resign, for instance, authored a holocaust-denial book. To his credit, he later repudiated it, but the very fact that such books are written and taken seriously shows a lot.
It is here that the so-called "anti-zionist" jews like Chomsky and Finkelstein come in so handy to the antisemites. They provide the necessary "hairsbreadth": "but I am not REALLY an antisemite, why, so-and-so is a jew and he agrees with me!"
on ABC news, in the background during a few frames, a swastika was clearly painted on the wall.
I suppose that this isn't a "politicized" symbol.
For many Palestinians, Hitler is a hero to be emulated. Holocaust denial (and worse, justification) is rife in what passes for "education" in the Palestinian authority.
The "moderate" PA prime minister who Arafat caused to resign, for instance, authored a holocaust-denial book. To his credit, he later repudiated it, but the very fact that such books are written and taken seriously shows a lot.
epepke
Philosopher
- Joined
- Oct 22, 2003
- Messages
- 9,264
Skeptic said:
Of course, it is entirely possible to be a Jew and disagree with the policies of Israel. There are very few positive adjectives I'd apply to Chomsky, but amongst those few is "sincere." It may be a sincerity not entirely dissimilar to that of a chronic undifferentiated schizophrenic, but it is a sort of sincerity.
I know many American Jews who don't even like Israelis, but that's possibly just because of their tendency to get so up close that you can see the contents of every pore in their faces. One of the punchiest paragraphs comparing Israel to Hitler was in Every Goy's Guide to Common Jewish Expressions.
I normally try to give people the benefit of the doubt. However, that experience I described was like a 1-2-3 punch, as follows:
1) That the incident with the girl wearing Star-of-David earrings happened in the first place. Also that it happened in Canada.
2) That my mentioning of it was met with the, to me, bogus notion that the Star of David was inherently an affront, by what seems to me tortuous reasoning.
3) Most importantly, that of all the many people on that board who were consistently pro-Palestinian, none challenged the notion.
This seems to me at least prima facie evidence that there is a significant contingent that simply hides ordinary Jew-hatred under a banner of Anti-Zionism.
Now, as an atheist, there is a sort of geas or obligation on me to distance myself from members of The Atheist Community™ with whom I don't want to be identified. I do this by frequently criticizing American Atheists, who often seem to me more interested in hatred of religion than actual atheism.
As a skeptic, the situation is similar. I respond to this obligation by frequently criticizing skeptics who display simple closed-mindedness of the kind that woo-woos accuse all skeptics of harboring.
As a computer programmer, user interface designer, electronics engineer, brewer, cook, sex wizard, citizen of the US, recovering shybie, weightlifter, musician, marksman, pinball player, whatever I happen to be at the time etc., the situation is also similar.
I do not jump for joy at these obligations, but I accept them as the price for having the right to take umbrage and deliver sarcastic put-downs when I am personally accused of being something that I am not.
I think that, for far too long, the umbrella group of Anti-Zionists have gotten a free ride, and I think it's time to stop. Defaults don't cut it any more.
I'm not an Anti-Zionist (nor am I a Pro-Zionist), but if I were, I could point to reasons I could not be called an Anti-Semite: the Bar Mitzvahs and ordinary services I've attended, my meagre attempts at least to have some basic understanding of the Tanakh, my participation at seders, my faltering attempts at learning some Hebrew, my more successful attempts at learning Yiddish, etc. This is way more than I expect from others. The obligation need not be an onerous one, but there is some obligation.
I know many American Jews who don't even like Israelis, but that's possibly just because of their tendency to get so up close that you can see the contents of every pore in their faces.
There's an old joke about this: asked, "excuse me, what do you think of the meat shortage?" the Russian replied, "what's 'meat'?", the American, "what's 'shortage'?", the israeli, "what's 'excuse me'?".
Seriously, though, the Chomsky-Finkelstein one-two punch is not celebrated by the antisemites because they criticize or dislike things israel does, but in their white-hot hatered of israel, their belief that it (alone of all nations) is "illegitimate" and "racist", their desire that it should be dismantled, etc. They give an air of legitimacy, not to disliking or criticizing israel (which isn't necessarily antisemitic, of course), but to calling for its destruction and for a second holocaust, which is.
To give an analogy, there are many in the USA--including many Latinos, I'll bet--who dislike illegal Mexican immigrants. But how many Americans consider Mexico an "illegitimate" country which must be destroyed?
1) That the incident with the girl wearing Star-of-David earrings happened in the first place. Also that it happened in Canada.
If you are surprised that such things can happen in a civilized, cosmopolitan nation which left the middle ages far beind and always treated jews well, I've got two words for you: "1930s Germany".
2) That my mentioning of it was met with the, to me, bogus notion that the Star of David was inherently an affront, by what seems to me tortuous reasoning.
Antisemites always have a reason why it is "really" the jews' fault that they are hated, and why it is "jewish provocation" that caused them to do what they did, coupled with suggestions that if only the jews "knew their place" (in this case, not wear "provocative" stars of david) the violence wouldn't happen.
3) Most importantly, that of all the many people on that board who were consistently pro-Palestinian, none challenged the notion.
This seems to me at least prima facie evidence that there is a significant contingent that simply hides ordinary Jew-hatred under a banner of Anti-Zionism.
I agree--although I would say, in mitigation, that for some, the reason for not speaking out is not necessarily agreement with the idiotic "party line" that star-of-david earrings are "zionist" (and therefore wearing them is "racist", etc., etc., etc.), but simply fear of ostracism. Perhaps some people in the group wanted to speak out. But they could have imagined the next accusation: "why are you defending her? Are you a zionist, too???". They were risking ostracism for disagreeing with the "party line".
Contrary to popular belief, the so-called "progressive", "anti-racist", etc. movement is largely totalitarian and regimented, where everybody must toe the party line or be cast into the outer darkness. If the "progressive" movement decided tomorrow that the earth is flat and that all those who disagree are "racist" or "imperialist" (after all, wasn't it the belief that the earth was round that enabled Colombus to said to conquer native people without fear of falling off the edge of the earth?), you'll get many people to profess belief in that, too.
As a computer programmer, user interface designer, electronics engineer, brewer, cook, sex wizard, citizen of the US, recovering shybie, weightlifter, musician, marksman, pinball player, whatever I happen to be at the time etc., the situation is also similar.
I do not jump for joy at these obligations,
I'll bet fighting the ossified, beurocratic heirarchy of the sex wizards' establishment is a real pain.
I think that, for far too long, the umbrella group of Anti-Zionists have gotten a free ride, and I think it's time to stop. Defaults don't cut it any more.
Indeed so. But, again, you forget: the "anti-racist" movement, like most such movements, is not dedicated to making people think for themselves about racism, colonialism, zionism, imperialism, etc. It is there precisely to REPLACE thought with a ready-made "party line" which is the "truth".
There's an old joke about this: asked, "excuse me, what do you think of the meat shortage?" the Russian replied, "what's 'meat'?", the American, "what's 'shortage'?", the israeli, "what's 'excuse me'?".
Seriously, though, the Chomsky-Finkelstein one-two punch is not celebrated by the antisemites because they criticize or dislike things israel does, but in their white-hot hatered of israel, their belief that it (alone of all nations) is "illegitimate" and "racist", their desire that it should be dismantled, etc. They give an air of legitimacy, not to disliking or criticizing israel (which isn't necessarily antisemitic, of course), but to calling for its destruction and for a second holocaust, which is.
To give an analogy, there are many in the USA--including many Latinos, I'll bet--who dislike illegal Mexican immigrants. But how many Americans consider Mexico an "illegitimate" country which must be destroyed?
1) That the incident with the girl wearing Star-of-David earrings happened in the first place. Also that it happened in Canada.
If you are surprised that such things can happen in a civilized, cosmopolitan nation which left the middle ages far beind and always treated jews well, I've got two words for you: "1930s Germany".
2) That my mentioning of it was met with the, to me, bogus notion that the Star of David was inherently an affront, by what seems to me tortuous reasoning.
Antisemites always have a reason why it is "really" the jews' fault that they are hated, and why it is "jewish provocation" that caused them to do what they did, coupled with suggestions that if only the jews "knew their place" (in this case, not wear "provocative" stars of david) the violence wouldn't happen.
3) Most importantly, that of all the many people on that board who were consistently pro-Palestinian, none challenged the notion.
This seems to me at least prima facie evidence that there is a significant contingent that simply hides ordinary Jew-hatred under a banner of Anti-Zionism.
I agree--although I would say, in mitigation, that for some, the reason for not speaking out is not necessarily agreement with the idiotic "party line" that star-of-david earrings are "zionist" (and therefore wearing them is "racist", etc., etc., etc.), but simply fear of ostracism. Perhaps some people in the group wanted to speak out. But they could have imagined the next accusation: "why are you defending her? Are you a zionist, too???". They were risking ostracism for disagreeing with the "party line".
Contrary to popular belief, the so-called "progressive", "anti-racist", etc. movement is largely totalitarian and regimented, where everybody must toe the party line or be cast into the outer darkness. If the "progressive" movement decided tomorrow that the earth is flat and that all those who disagree are "racist" or "imperialist" (after all, wasn't it the belief that the earth was round that enabled Colombus to said to conquer native people without fear of falling off the edge of the earth?), you'll get many people to profess belief in that, too.
As a computer programmer, user interface designer, electronics engineer, brewer, cook, sex wizard, citizen of the US, recovering shybie, weightlifter, musician, marksman, pinball player, whatever I happen to be at the time etc., the situation is also similar.
I do not jump for joy at these obligations,
I'll bet fighting the ossified, beurocratic heirarchy of the sex wizards' establishment is a real pain.
I think that, for far too long, the umbrella group of Anti-Zionists have gotten a free ride, and I think it's time to stop. Defaults don't cut it any more.
Indeed so. But, again, you forget: the "anti-racist" movement, like most such movements, is not dedicated to making people think for themselves about racism, colonialism, zionism, imperialism, etc. It is there precisely to REPLACE thought with a ready-made "party line" which is the "truth".
