The Judenrein anti-war Left. In
last week's exciting episode, Michael Lerner went public with his snub and the story made the headlines. This week the
Forward picks up the story:. . . a spokesman for another of the Sunday rally's organizing groups, United for Peace and Justice, said the decision to bar Lerner from speaking was made by all four organizing groups, not by Answer alone. "I do not like what Rabbi Lerner did here," said Bob Wing, a representative of United for Peace and Justice, who helped draft the roster of speakers. Wing said Lerner's criticism "really inflamed the issue in a way that wasn't necessary."
("Shut up, uppity Jew. We don't want attention called to our movement's anti-Israel stance, get it?")
Says Lerner:
"I was going to speak against the war and speak against the antisemitism of the antiwar movement. . . .That's one of the things that made them so upset."
Duh, yeah. See, I disagree with
Sam Schulman that Lerner is a pathetic dupe, desperate to be accepted by an anti-semitic clique. Certainly Lerner's verbosity, pop-psych rhetoric, and clumsy protest antics make him easy to ridicule. But he's been a Leftist activist since his college years, and the Left has been just as anti-semitic for most of that time as it is now. Lerner isn't stupid. I disagree vehemently with his political positions on the Iraq war and Israel, but he is useful as a gadfly.
Lerner says in the
Wall Street Journal:There is a huge difference between criticism of Ariel Sharon's repressive treatment of the Palestinian people and a refusal to accept the fundamental legitimacy of Israel's existence. For years, those of us who want democratic rights for Palestinians have been dubbed "self-hating Jews" by right-wingers in the Jewish world. Now, some on the left insist that if we support human rights we must also uncritically support the violence of some Palestinian "freedom fighters" who make no secret of their desire to overthrow the Zionist enterprise.
That's why we recently created a new national organization supporting a "progressive middle path" that is both pro-Israel and pro-Palestinian. We call for an end to the occupation, the creation of a Palestinian state and reparations for Palestinian refugees. But we also call for reparations for Jews who fled Arab states, and for Israel's admission into NATO--or some other equally powerful military alliance--to give the Jewish state genuine security.
Putting aside for a moment the justice or practicality of this "progessive middle path" - by refusing to allow the demagogues on the Left to frame the Israel question as black and white, by calling out A.N.S.W.E.R. in a widely-respected daily, Lerner focuses national attention on the group, forcing it to issue
tortured rationalizations for its policies. Reasonable people can disagree on how to safeguard the existence of the US or Israel, and a mature political movement doesn't fear differences of opinion, or need to demonize a particular group. By publicly refusing to fit neatly into their pigeonholes, Lerner is challenging A.N.S.W.E.R. to act like grown-ups.
The
Jewish Week also mentions the Lerner controversy in a profile of
New York's antiwar Jews.Elyse Newman, a freelance editor and practitioner of Reiki massage from Park Slope, Brooklyn, says she felt uncomfortable with the lack of Jewish presence — and the abundance of anti-Israel voices — at October’s antiwar rally in Washington. “Jews traditionally in this country have spearheaded lots of left-wing organizations and have put themselves out there for causes that did not necessarily benefit them directly. I identify with being that kind of Jew,” she said. "It made me very unhappy to see that I was being left out, that I could have strong antiwar feelings and not have a place where I could feel comfortable voicing my opinion.”
Leftist Jews will flock to the
United for Peace and Justice rally because it is (slightly) more Israel-friendly than A.N.S.W.E.R., (although it had no compunction about supporting A.N.S.W.E.R. in barring Lerner from the podium). UFPJ will also attract the many activists who are turned off by A.N.S.W.E.R.'s tight control of the agenda, purist fevor, and grab-bag of (often loony) Marxist causes.
Lerner's publicity will help marginalize A.N.S.W.E.R., and along with it the latest resurgence of Leftist anti-semitism, I hope. But that result also depends on the continued education and self-criticism of UFPJ, and
I'm not holding my breath.The
Jewish Week also did
a quick survey on Jewish attitudes toward the impending war, mentioning that
". . . a recent Shalom Center ad campaign urging Jews to call on mainstream Jewish organizations to speak out against the war generated little grassroots response, even though contact information for several of the groups was listed.
This reminded me that about a month ago, Oxblog
suggested that pro-war Jews use the contact info in this ad to email those leaders in support of the war. According to the
Jewish Week, Rabbi Jerome Epstein, executive vice president of the United Synagogue of Conservative Judaism, said he only received 38 calls and e-mails in response to the ad, and 17 of those were in favor of going to war. . . .
Rabbi Eric Yoffie, president of the Reform movement's Union of American Hebrew Congregations, said he received a similar response to the ad - approximately 24 against the war and 12 in favor."
Hmmm. I wonder if the Oxblog campaign had anything to do with their emails running 50/50 in spite of a full-page antiwar ad in the NYTimes . . . .
Do you know what IPT means? Imshin can
help. I love this woman. She better watch out after I move back to Israel: I'll be stalking her.
Blegium's court ruling: I am under the impression that many in the blogosphere and the larger media are missing an important point, so I'd like to make sure it is clarified. The latest decision of the
Belgian court is not only about Sharon. In fact, Sharon is off the hook now, since he enjoys diplomatic immunity. The truly problematic part of that decision is about Amos Yaron, who commanded the IDF forces in Beirut at the time of the Sabra and Chattila massacre, and who is now facing the possibility of being prosecuted. He does not enjoy diplomatic immunity, as do not any IDF soldiers who may become targets of similar prosecutions in the future. And I have no doubt that the Belgians would not miss an opportunity to apply this to American soldiers as well, should it arise.
Nelson writes:Hello.
A friend of mine who happens to be an excellent poet and an excellent person sent me a text against the war written by Senator Robert Byrd of Virginia, and asked me to move it further if I agreed with it. After following closely all the posturing of so many of my most mediocre colleagues in the Anglo-Saxon world and elsewhere, I have to confess that his mail, by an admirable poet, left me pretty saddened. I deplore the standpoint taken by almost all poets I admire, but I will continue to admire their work as far as it continues to deserve literary, poetic and esthetic admiration. I'm under no illusion, however, that the professional differentiation I will go on making between the other poets' works and their politics will be neither reciprocated nor extended to poets like me who, because they see the political landscape of the world in other terms, are, I'm in no doubt about it, in the absolute minority in the literary community. On the other hand, it is also true that I couldn't care less about it. Here is the answer I sent him today.
All best
Nelson Ascher
Paris
Having lived in a military dictatorship myself and knowing through my parents about their experience with much worse dictatorships (fascist and communist Hungary, Nazi Germany), having seen innocent people murdered by religious fanatics in NY, Jerusalem, Tel Aviv and Haifa, Indonesia etc., having visited synagogues burned down recently in Europe, and after having seen below my own Parisian window people marching with openly anti-Semitic slogans, I think you'll understand me if I'll ask you a small favor. It is the following: please direct me to sites where I can find poets fighting against tyranny, dictatorship, Muslim fundamentalism, fascistic Arab nationalism, against people who praise and/or promote the intentional murder of civilians because, for instance, they are Americans, Australians, Brits, Jews. I'd like to know if there is any site with poets fighting for justice for the Kurds and the punishment of those guilty for their massacre. I'd also like to know if there's any site where poets write and fight against the bizarre and sadistic North Korean dictatorship. Once I had dinner with script writer Jean Claude Carriere and a friend of his, an exiled Iranian writer with whom he translated medieval Persian poetry into French. They both explained to me that the only way to imagine the Iranian parliament would be to think of an European one where there'd be places only for bishops and cardinals. Surely, thus, in the US there must also be sites with poets fighting against such a regime. Am I wrong? I'd also like to know if there's any site with poets writing about the crimes of the Belgians, older ones like Congo, more recent ones, like the murder of Patrice Lumumba, and pretty new ones, like their guilt in the genocide in Rwanda. By the way, any chance of finding a web site with poets protesting against Russian crimes in Chechnya, Chinese ones in Tibet, French ones all over Africa, the French backing of military dictatorship in Algeria, the Rwandan genocide, and their military intervention in the Ivory Coast? A country with so many excellent poets like the US surely has poets worrying about all these things, doesn't it? Humbly, I myself, in Brazil, had time to write in my newspaper against so many tyrants, from Pinochet to Castro, I had also time to write about all the massacres perpetrated in the Arab world besides Sabra and Chattila. So, I believe, there must be lots of poets writing and protesting against all of this. I cannot imagine that thousands of poets are obsessed only with writing about Bush or trying to save one more tyrant's skin. Coming to think of it, I can remember many great poets who wrote in praise of Stalin, Lenin, Hitler, Franco, Mussolini, Mao, for god's sake, even Enver Hodja. But I find it not only hard to remember any who wrote against any of the above without in the same breath praising some of the others, but I don't remember any great poet who wrote consistently good odes in praise of good old bourgeois democracy. But maybe I'll find the site for which they've been writing. As a Trotskyite since my teens I cannot but fight fascism, be it black, red or green. Oh yes, I do know about things that are worse than war: my two grandfathers and my paternal grandmother, I'm sure, would have loved the chance to die fighting in a war instead of being killed in the way they were.
Matza for the Masses: Meryl
notes: "One of the funniest things I've noticed in Richmond is that kosher food, which is in an aisle labeled "kosher" in New Jersey (where I'm from), is in the aisle labeled "international" here (where I moved). I had no idea Jewish food was that foreign to southerners."
Meryl, in most grocery stores in Washington, D.C., not only do the matzos get stacked in the International section, but the labels on the boxes read:
NOT KOSHER FOR PASSOVER.
Some deservedly strong reactions in Israel to the Belgium
court ruling. BTW, I am afraid that the AP reading of this is a bit too optimistic.
IBA radio says that the owner of the
Princess hotel in Eilat has informed the Belgian ambassador in Israel that Belgian citizens are not welcome in his hotel, as long as that court decision remains in force. I like the spirit of it, although I seriously doubt that many are coming as it is. Imshin has some
thoughts of her own on Belgium.
Jews at the heart of the Middle East's water shortage: Was there ever any doubt?
The news agency of the United Arab Emirates, WAM, reported recently that the Emirates-based Zayed Centre for Coordination and Follow-Up has published a book titled Israel´s Water Security, “dealing with the conflict arising from the Israeli plans and expansionist designs.” The book attempts to “analyze the repercussions of these designs on Arab security,” WAM reported, “It explains various dimensions of the plan and Israel´s policies related to water.”
The book also purportedly reveals “how the Israeli leaders feel about their own robbing of the Arab water,” the UAE agency said. Furthermore, paraphrasing from an article in the Kuwaiti al-Khaleej Times, WAM said that “[t]his is what made the Jewish state drop the water issue from the agenda of bilateral negotiations at the Madrid Conference. It decided to keep it as a last resort to negotiate, as it was considered an untouchable issue....” According to the Emirates reporting, “the Israeli concept of water security, the study explains... is based on the premise that water is the backbone of the plan, since without it, subsequent migration to Israel would not continue. These motives made Israelis release their notorious map, which included its expansionist designs, extending to the water sources in Lebanon, Syria, Jordan, and to historical Palestine.” Expansionist designs, continues the UAE news agency, “pushed Israel to get water from the Jordan River and its tributaries, Litany River, Hajbani, al-Wazzani, Yarkmok, Baniyas and Aldna, until the Nile.”
After noting that the water security policy of Israel is merely a cover for “expansionist designs,” the United Arab Emirates news agency presents the Zayed Centre’s conclusion: “Israel does not suffer from any shortage of water, as do other countries in its neighborhood. It only hopes to escalate the problem in order to gain benefits and to justify its hegemony and control over the natural resources, including water, in the region.” The only answer, WAM concludes the issue, is “a collective Arab action to challenge these designs.” ...
Latest on the Judenrein anti-war Left. Yesterday I posted on Michael Lerner's attempt to speak at the A.N.S.W.E.R.-sponsored antiwar rally in the Bay Area (his home community). Apparently the expose by David Corn in the
Nation caused serious shit to hit the fan. Kesher Talk's own William Leon links to
more recent statements by the
Nation and
Tikkun in the pages of
FrontPage and the
WSJ. A.N.S.W.E.R. does some
spin control.I have been following the conflict between the pro-Israel Jewish left and the antiwar movement for the last month. If you start
here and use the links to work backwards, you will find a bit of a contrast between how the West Coast - A.N.S.W.E.R. - and the East Coast - The United for Peace and Justice Coalition - is including antiwar Jewish groups.
Email from Arthur Waskow on the topic, received today:
Statement from Rabbi Arthur Waskow, Director of The Shalom Center, in regard to the question of speakers at the antiwar marches this weekend:
It is clear that one strand of the antiwar movement of Americans opposed to a US attack upon Iraq is intensely and narrowly focused on a politics that stigmatizes and demonizes Israel, and another strand is focused on preventing war with Iraq, peacefully meeting the need for protecting the world from possible Iraqi attack, and reaching out to the many mainstream of American society, including the Jewish community.
The controversy over whether Michael Lerner can speak at an antiwar rally stems from the collision of these two strands.
ANSWER embodies the first; United for Peace and Justice the second.
We of course take our stand with the second. We hope that Rabbi Lerner will be reinvited to speak.
We welcome and celebrate the fact that before this ruckus exploded, UPJ had invited Ruth Messinger, a leader of the
Jewish community, a vigorous progressive well known inside and beyond the Jewish community, and an opponent of the rush to war against Iraq, to speak in the New York antiwar rally of Feb. 15. [ Emphasis mine - JW ]
Ruth Messinger is president of American Jewish World Service, former Borough President of Manhatan, and former Democratric Party candidate for Mayor of New York City.
L' Shalom,
Rabbi Arthur Waskow, Director
The Shalom Center
UPDATE: Instapundit has
a few more links on the Michael Lerner story, and points out something I had been thinking as well:
I can't help but feel that the decision to blackball speakers who had criticized coalition members was primarily designed to protect A.N.S.W.E.R.'s position by muting criticism of its positions.
It does smell a lot like the days when women and gays were told to shut up about sexism and homophobia in the testosterone-charged SDS-run anti-Vietnam-War movement. It's not as if A.N.S.W.E.R. has ever been narrowly-focused on the war - their tendency to feature every cause from Mumia to GM foods at their rallies is so well-known it has even been satirized by SNL. But if the issue is anti-semitism or Israel's right to exist, all of a sudden we must close ranks and speak with one voice.
A view from the German Street. Chris Newman
posts an email from a reader in Germany. Not very encouraging. (sort of via
In Context)
Liberals for liberation. Vodkapundit is compiling a list of pro-war liberal blogs. I knew there were a lot of us.
Anti-war leftists turn on their favorite Jewish son: Prominent pro-Palestinian activist Rabbi Micheal Lerner has been
barred from speaking at an anti-war event in San Francisco because ANSWER feels he is too pro-Israel. Anyone who follows Lerner's activities (as we do here at Kesher Talk) should find this both amusing and disturbing.
On the one hand, it is a great PR coup for Lerner, making him look much more of a friend to Israel than he might otherwise... and it also reveals ANSWER for the anti-semitic anti-Israeli campaign that it is.
Other coalitions organizing the rally, including Not in Our Name and United for Peace and Justice, have acceded to ANSWER's opposition to Lerner, on the grounds that they had previously accepted as a condition for participation in the demonstration the agreement that if one of the groups vetoed a speaker that all would have to agree.
Damian Penny has his doubts about this one:
I strongly doubt the ADL or Simon Wiesenthal Center are putting pressure on anti-war protestors to keep Lerner from addressing their rallies, and it's telling that the writers cannot name a single example of the "organized Jewish world" keeping him from speaking.
And in today's
Wall Street Journal (subscription required), Lerner expresses his own befuddlement:
it is inconceivable that these anti-war coalitions would let A.N.S.W.E.R. ban a speaker if he accused that group of racism, sexism or homophobia. Why should anti-Semitism be treated differently, as the acceptable -ism?
It is outrageous that those of us who wish to protest against what we see as a fundamentally unjust war must be subjected to a barrage of slogans and speeches that are one-sidedly hostile to Israel. That is just as outrageous as some in the Jewish community claiming that our opposition to war makes us champions of Palestinian groups which use terror and violence against Israeli civilians.
Lerner concludes his article with a heartening pledge:
The most painful thing has been watching other anti-war groups make unprincipled compromises with A.N.S.W.E.R. As a result, there is support on the left for self-determination for every group in the world except the Jewish people. Fellow progressive Jews, some anxious to speak at these rallies, have urged me to keep quiet about anti-Semitism on the left. After all, they say, stopping the war against Iraq is so much more important.
Why should we have to choose? Tikkun will be bringing thousands of our supporters to the demonstration Sunday. But just as we fought against the sexism and homophobia that once infected the left, we will challenge anti-Semitism and Israel-bashing on the left, even as we say "no" to a war with Iraq.
The tomboy of the Plaza. A panegyric to
Eloise.
National Self-righteousness Dept. We learn
from LGF commenters that Canada interned those of German as well as Japanese ancestry during WWII. This
history of Canadian anti-semitism tells of riots, job discrimination, and prime minister Mackenzie King's admiration of Hitler in the late 30s.
King visited Germany to meet Chancellor Adolf Hitler, and recorded: "My sizing up ... was that he is really one who truly loves his fellow man ... There was a liquid quality about (his eyes) which indicates keen perception and profound sympathy. Calm, composed, and one could see how particularly humble folk would have come to have profound love for the man. As I talked with him I could not but think of Joan of Arc. He is distinctly a mystic."
The following day, our PM had lunch with the Nazi foreign minister Konstantin von Neurath, who "admitted that they had taken some pretty rough steps ... but the truth was the country was going to pieces ... He said to me that I would have loathed living in Berlin with the Jews, and the way in which they had increased their numbers in the city, and were taking possession of its more important part. . . . "
And how did Canada's prime minister react to these diabolically racist and extremely ominous comments by one of the most powerful leaders of the Third Reich?
"I wrote a letter of some length by hand to von Neurath whom I like exceedingly. He is, if there ever was one, a genuinely kind, good man."
(Oh, and the article is by former prime minister Brian Mulroney, at a conference on anti-Semitism at the University of Toronto.)
Another great post from
Imshin, which includes an amazing story on how an Iraqi Jewish man saved Saddam's life before he was even born. And, yes, Arabic should be compulsory.
Getcher ring-side seat!The cross-blog war debate is starting. In this corner [cheers! boos!],
No War Blog, otherwise known as Stand Down representing the antiwar side [cheers! boos!]. And in this corner [cheers! boos!]
Truth Laid Bear representing the pro-war side [cheers! boos!] . The rules according to TLB:
Feb 10 - Feb 16 : Open Response Period
Listed below are the five questions developed here on TTLB to be answered by the anti-war crowd, as well as the five questions that Stand Down has put together for pro-war bloggers to address.
If you'd like to join the debate, it's easy: just go ahead and answer the appropriate set of questions on your weblog, and then let either myself or Stand Down know with a TrackBack ping or comment. On February 17th, a roundup of responses will be posted here and at Stand Down.
The comments so far are pretty interesting. I hope to put my $0.02 in before Feb. 17th.
"Reality" must be finger-quoted. Mark Goldblatt, a roving sheepskin-clad wolf among the baa-ing flock of the
Modern Language Association, has some fun with
finger-quoting black-turtleneck-clad intellectuals.On the one hand, Leftist intellectuals — drenched by now in postmodern hogwash — dismiss the suggestion that the world exists independently of our perceptions, and that knowledge claims can be measured objectively against it. . . . On the other hand, Leftist intellectuals have no problem whatsoever telling people who disagree with them that they're wrong. That's not oppression . . . that's (open finger-quotes) education (close finger-quotes). . . . In other words, they claim that they see beneath the surface while simultaneously claiming that the surface is all there is.
(via LGF comments)
UPDATE: Here's another
view of the same subject by Leon Weiseltier, dissecting a relativist critique of Orwell in the
New Yorker. Menand sneakily makes Orwell over in his own diffident, perspectivist, mildly anti-intellectual image, so as to relieve us of Orwell's obligations. "He is not saying, This is the way it objectively was from any possible point of view. He is saying, This is the way it looked to someone with my beliefs." This is madly incorrect. Here is Orwell in 1942, in "Looking Back on the Spanish War," reflecting on the lies of wartime: This kind of thing is frightening to me, because it often gives me the feeling that the very concept of objective truth is fading out of the world. ... I am willing to believe that history is for the most part inaccurate and biased, but what is peculiar to our age is the abandonment of the idea that history could be truthfully written. In the past people deliberately lied, or they unconsciously colored what they wrote, or they struggled after the truth, well knowing that they must make many mistakes; but in each case they believed that 'the facts' existed and were more or less discoverable.
Orwell plainly regards the eclipse of objective truth as a decline and a danger. This passage, and there are more like it, is not an expression of perspectivism, it is a repudiation of perspectivism.
(via
Oxblog)
It seems to have been just pouring out of me today, doesn’t it? Well, you can all blame Nelson for this. Just as I was going about my business cleaning and cooking, he had to send me this e-mail, and get me thinking about all this stuff that absolutely does not put dinner on the table. Good thing I don’t have a real job…And this is much more fun, too! Nelson, more please!
Anyway, where was I? Oh, and then there is this whole issue of Israel and Europe. Traditionally, Israel viewed itself as part of Europe, at least culturally. Specifically the Old Western Europe. See, Rumsfeld’s Old Europe used to be the New Europe, because before 1917 there was just “Europe”. So even though Israel was founded mostly by Eastern European Jews, and even though it has flirted with communism quite a bit, after Stalin’s death we had to choose sides, and we chose the safe side. And then came the 60ies, and Israeli intellectual and artistic “elite” went to Paris and London, and everyone listened to the Beatles and the Stones, or to Jacques Brel and Charles Aznavour, if they were older. And Europe is much closer and less expensive to fly to. And the food! And the clothes! You get the picture.
I still have a lot of this left in me. I am still annoyed by many things in America, mostly little things, like…well, like food and clothes. And the malls. What can I say: it’s shallow, I know. I never said I was perfect. I know many Israelis who feel the way I do, both on this shallow level, and on the deeper one, the one that has to do with basic trust. But I am also sure that the feelings towards Europe are becoming more and more mixed, to say the least. It’s not that we are becoming disillusioned. We never had many illusions. Those of us who were born in Europe, are used to live with the idea that everyone hates the Jew. Those who were born in Israel feel that everyone hates Israel. This is something we take for granted. It’s like mosquitoes: some are deadly, but most are just annoying. So you put a repellent on, or a screen in your window, and go on with your life.
While I was writing the previous post, I remembered this
post Steve has written a while ago. It is very worth reading, as I think it is quite representative of the way Israel is viewed by non-Jewish Americans. Steve lists only a few reasons for the traditional support the US has given Israel, and that is because there are many. But he makes one thing clear: he does not trust Israel as much as he trusts the Australians and the British. He explains the reasons for this, but I’d like to stress the most important reason: we all prefer to trust people who are more like us. So it is not a coincidence that it is the Anglo-Saxon countries that Steve thinks are the most trusted friends and allies of the US.
I have no clear idea how most American Jews view this issue, since I was not born and raised here, although I am sure that that view is quite complex. So I am only going to speak from an Israeli perspective. I think that Israelis are about as suspicious of America’s motives, as Americans (non-Jews) are suspicious of Israel’s motives, and probably for the same reasons. It is unpleasant for me to admit, but that is the reality the way I see it. Besides, it is not a terrible thing to live with, and I have a strong feeling that it is bound to change significantly in a not so distant future.
Paradoxically, Israel and the US have more in common than many in both nations realize. For one thing, it is likely that Israel and the US are the two countries in the Western (i.e. “developed) world with the most religious populations. Unlike in the US, in Israel the separation of religion from the state is far from complete, but that is a different issue. But I have to tell that I was amazed by how religious many Americans were when I first came here 12 years ago. This is not something that is reflected in the “American culture” the way it is exported abroad. Even the Cosby family was never shown going to church on a Sunday morning.
There is also the frontier mentality, to which Steve attributes part of what he perceives as the American Jacksonianism, and which has it’s origins in the respective histories of both countries. There are few other, more anecdotal similarities. I always remember 19-century novels, in which Europeans described Americans as “loud” and “rude”. Obviously, there were no Israelis yet at that time. OK, forget that last example.
Latest on the Judenrein anti-war Left. I've been reporting on the twists and turns in the relationship between the antiwar Left and its Jewish contingent which has the temerity to believe that Israel has the right to exist and be treated like any other nation. An
article by David Corn in the
Nation reports how A.N.S.W.E.R. is refusing to allow uber-Lefty Jew Michael Lerner to speak at a Bay Area rally (his home community), and has a link to a petition supporting Lerner. (Corn has been a thoughtful critic of the Left's tendency to totalitarianism, and previously took the movement to task for letting the Stalinist group A.N.S.W.E.R. run its protests.)
Instapundit and
Sullivan both comment.
(For those who haven't followed Left international politics for the past 30 years, this is SOP. The international Left decided Israel was a bad guy after it defeated its Arab adversaries in 1967, and has treated Jewish national aspirations as a special case ever since - I'm still waiting for the set of criteria for nationhood that justifies a Palestinian state but not a Jewish one. I am looking for good online articles on the history of Jews in the Left since the 60s. I have
stuff in books which I might end up typing in, but anything already in electronic format is preferable. SEND ME LINKS!)
(. . . and as far as we know, the NYC antiwar coalition has a
rally permit. Latest from Diane on what she correctly terms a "tempest in a teapot,"
the request for a march permit.)
UPDATE:
William Leon and
I both report on latest developments.
In light of the recent crisis between the US and the Old Europe over Iraq, my friend Nelson asks himself the same question Jews everywhere for thousands of years have been asking themselves: Is All This Good Or Bad For Jews? In the most immediate future the answer is most obviously “yes”: a rift between the backers of the “Road Map” is good news. On the other hand, I can without much difficulty imagine a situation where the State Dept. may promise ze French and ze Germans support for ze Map, in exchange for more flexibility on Iraq. What do I know?
Unfortunately, we live in a cynical world. Moreover, cynicism aside, people and countries are looking out for their own interests, which is the way it should be. My husband was very impressed with the support Bush has showed for Israel, and said that he will be voting Republican from now on. I don’t know. I don’t remember that much support before 9/11. And I still remember Bush’s father, who I think is a good man, but who was looking out for his country’s interests at the time. And I also remember Clinton, who loved Israel so much, he nearly loved us to death. I am also likely to vote Republican in the foreseeable future, but that is mostly because there is no decent alternative at this time.
Diversity in University: Eugene Volokh examines what would happen if we made
university faculties look like America -- Jews would be ejected.
All good news, all the time. If you need a break from suicide bombers, a depressed economy, a dead astronaut, and international scapegoating, stop by
here. This is also a good resource site if you get into arguments with people who think Israel is a debilitating drain on the US.
(via
Head Heeb, who is also looking for
Good News from Palestine. If you have any, help him out.)
Internment camps - pro and con. Very interesting
LGF comment thread about WWII internment camps in the US and Canada. Ranbutan manages to annoy several people, as usual.
Our friends PETA: Fom the Feb. 7
Washinton Post:
Our friends at People for the Ethical Treatment of Animals have outdone themselves this time, sending a deferential letter to Yasser Arafat about a Jan. 26 Jerusalem bombing in which a donkey -- but no human beings -- died after being strapped with explosives and detonated.
"Your Excellency," PETA President Ingrid Newkirk wrote in the note faxed on Monday to Arafat's headquarters in Ramallah. "We have received many calls and letters from people shocked at the bombing. . . . All nations behave abominably in many ways when they are fighting their enemies, and animals are always caught in the crossfire. The U.S. Army abandoned thousands of loyal service dogs in Vietnam. Al-Qaeda and the British government have both used animals in hideously cruel biological weaponry tests. We watched on television as stray cats in your own compound fled as best they could from the Israeli bulldozers. . . . If you have the opportunity, will you please add to your burdens my request that you appeal to all those who listen to you to leave the animals out of this conflict?"
Yesterday we asked Newkirk if she considered asking Arafat to persuade those who listen to him to stop blowing up people as well. "It's not my business to inject myself into human wars," she replied. Israeli Embassy spokesman Mark Regev declined to comment on PETA's plea, but told us: "I find it ironic that the Palestinian leaders choose to send donkeys to kill civilians. Surely, the Palestinian people deserve better than the current bunch of asses who run their affairs."
Jewish Life Dept. I didn't blog much last week because I had a stomach bug and also had to learn the Shabbat ma'ariv service in a hurry because when I offered to lead it on my
50th birthday last Friday at a potluck dinner, I thought I knew the nusach better than I did. But it went fine. (I didn't go back to Austin after all, since it was a last minute idea and most of my Austin friends already had plans for Friday night.)
(BTW everything also went very well
last Saturday. I will post my d'var Real Soon Now. I advanced several ideas on the parsha that it turns out the sages had thought of before me, offered one (maybe) original thought, quoted Rashi, Sanhedrin 7b, the Sforno, and the Sfas Emes, and most important: it came in under 10 minutes.)
Rally or march? I've been following the progress of the planned United for Peace and Justice peace march, from the vantage point of Jewish antiwar groups working with UFPJ to
accept a more pro-Israel presence than A.N.S.W.E.R. did. (I'm not antiwar, but like many I am concerned about the rabid anti-semitism and demonizing of Israel that has been acceptable to the peace movement so far.)
Anyway, I've gotten several emails from
Arthur this week asking me to urge various NYC officials to allow a parade permit, implying that this is a free speech issue. Turns out
the marchers already have a permit for a rally in front of the UN. Diane points out that there are very good safety reasons for not permitting a
march past the UN. So it doesn't seem to be a free speech issue after all.
