"Liberal" American Jew equates civic equality with genocide

S.A.M.

uniquely dreadful
Valued Senior Member
Can't wrap my head around this:
“It is troubling that Judaism and support for Israel have become so inextricably linked,” Vilkomerson said at the New York event. “We are trying to create a space in the Jewish world where we can express our criticism as Jews without needing to apologize for ourselves.”

That is a distinction that even many liberals do not embrace....Ben Cohen, a writer who has focused on American Jewish responses to Israel, [says], “But it is clear that many of their members dream about one state, and for those of us under the communal tent, one state is a code word for genocide.”

http://forward.com/articles/137016/#ixzz1JWJhDkQx

Do American Jews now consider it illiberal to receive the same civil rights as non-Jews?

Would they feel better if they were isolated in separate and exclusive communication management units?
 
When one considers how Jews in other predominately Muslim nations are treated, and dealt with disparagingly in some of their holy texts, it becomes difficult to wish for unity, knowing that this unity would probably lead to the same violence that preceded the war of 48. Fanatical religion and political power do not mix well.
 
When one considers how Jews in other predominately Muslim nations are treated, and dealt with disparagingly in some of their holy texts, it becomes difficult to wish for unity, knowing that this unity would probably lead to the same violence that preceded the war of 48. Fanatical religion and political power do not mix well.

What would you say to using the example of Israel in the treatment of Jewish minorities in other countries? Would American Jews prefer to be treated like non-Jewish minorities in Israel?
 
When one considers how Jews in other predominately Muslim nations are treated,
they were treated well ontil the war of conquest in 48
and dealt with disparagingly in some of their holy texts,
again after the war of conquest
it becomes difficult to wish for unity, knowing that this unity would probably lead to the same violence that preceded the war of 48.
only if we are as dishonetsas you are on this topic. you cannot use effects to validate the cause. the reason their was violence because of your faiths actions not the muslim and christians that didn't want foriegners to rule over them. unity wouldn't have resulted in violence it would have resulted in peace. its typical of you to blame the palestinians for your side love of violence.
Fanatical religion and political power do not mix well.
So you admit Israel was a mistake?
 
I think it's obvious to everybody but neocons, that Israel was a mistake. At least it should be by now, but I guess some are slower than others.
 
The problem with the 'mistake' of Israel

YoYoPapaya said:

I think it's obvious to everybody but neocons, that Israel was a mistake. At least it should be by now, but I guess some are slower than others.

I think a lot of people will hesitate on the word "mistake". American political language is a volatile stock, and this word can be extremely flammable.

That is, it does seem obvious that incorrect, unsuitable, counterproductive, and all sorts of bad decisions have been made along the way. But "mistake"? Yes, mistakes were made, as the saying goes. But is Israel a mistake?

Well, Israel in particular? Or is there something about Israel that makes it a mistake?

And that is where people get jumpy. Defining the mistake that is Israel generally presents such a challenge that people would rather avoid it.

Why is Israel a mistake?

Because it is Israel?

Because of where it is?

Because of who it is?

Because it is inherently religiously favoritist?

Because it is a bigoted, violative, belligerent state?

I cannot figure to what degree it is simply a headache for most people compared to the equation that goes: Israel = Jews = ain't touching that with a ten-foot pole. But the tangle over what has happened persists. I mean, let's start with that ever-spectral bogeyman, the anti-Semite trying to hide in legitimate politics.

Okay, so Israel is a mistake. Why Israel? Well, because there shouldn't be religious favoritism. Just like there shouldn't be a Muslim state. Well, okay, but what about Ireland?

(What?!)

Yeah, you heard me: What about Ireland?

Something about religious favoritism.

There comes a point at which many people's objections to Israel strike a bit too close to home, and they would have to accept that something they appreciate is likewise invalid.

Surely, though, there is some functional difference between Israel, Iran, and Ireland, for heaven's sake. And, to be certain, there is. But the difference between functional and principled argument is clear; the one is obliged to practicality while the other is not.

But people find themselves scraping together arcane recipes of logic; this amount of this degree of this context, applied in this manner explains why Israel and not Ireland.

And most people don't like to do that.

So the proposition of Israel as a "mistake" is the sort of adventure people look forward to like surfing at the event horizon. One wrong twitch and you're left tumbling uncontrollably into sightless, crushing density.
 
Hmm...
I don't know that Israel itself is a mistake...but the whole idea of exclusion on ethnic and religious grounds...I think that is a mistake.

It's a mistake Israel continues making. They can stop making it by ending apartheid, by treating Arab Israelis like full citizens (I know they don't have bomb shelters, while all the Jewish towns do...) and by either giving back a large part of what was Palestine...

Or simply declaring one state and treating the Palestinians like the equal humans they are, which is the solution I'm beginning to favor.

Personally I've jokingly said the following: Germany should have been forced to give up land for the Jewish state, not Palestine. Only it's not entirely funny, is it?

When Dick Armey said "I've been thinking about it and the Palestinians...should just go..." I joked that that must mean he was volunteering his district of the west hill country of Texas as the new Palestinian homeland...I mean, it looks a lot like Palestine...pretty similar climate, too...

In fact, if anyone wants to join me in advocating for the central-west Texas hill country being the new Palestinian homeland? West of Austin it kind of gets fairly empty...for the price of all the aid we send to Israel we could resettle them all in central-west Texas!
House them, help them start businesses and farms-very entrepreneurial people, the Palestinians...
I think it's an idea whose time has really come!
:D
Let's hear it for Texastine!
 
Last edited:
Can't wrap my head around this:


http://forward.com/articles/137016/#ixzz1JWJhDkQx

Do American Jews now consider it illiberal to receive the same civil rights as non-Jews?

Would they feel better if they were isolated in separate and exclusive communication management units?

Would that you showed as much concern for Jews and other minorities who are oppressed by Muslims as you do for the oppressed Muslims in Israel! What's the proportion here? I mean, it's okay to treat women like dirt in Saudi Arabia, Iran and about ten other Muslim nations--no cry fowl from you, but dare an Israeli not bend over backwards to accommodate explosive detonating Muslims. . . and BAM! Let the crying begin.

Number of Muslims "oppressed" by Jews: About 6 million.
Numbers of Jews, Christians, Gays, Women, Baha'i, apostates, "witches" and. . .well, everybody who is oppressed by Muslims: Do we even need to count?

If you were at least as obsessed either way, then I'd say, "Nope. She's even-Stephen" But since you ignore some atrocities in favor of others that offend you personally. . . I gotta call hypocrisy.

~Strinv
 
Can't wrap my head around this:

Probably not.

Do American Jews now consider it illiberal to receive the same civil rights as non-Jews?

??? Sorry: who is defining this? What is the 'communal tent'? Has anyone surveyed the attitudes of other liberal Jews?

I can appreciate that, for some people, a predictable end-run to the usual inference is better than thinking. It's like the song:

Lock him up and throw away the keys, boys
Mr. Jones is not like you or me
Lock him up tight
Cause if he had the chance he might
Show us that we're wrong
And that's the one thing we can't be
http://www.lyricsfreak.com/s/spirit+of+the+west/putting+ups+with+the+joneses_20554376.html
 
Would that you showed as much concern for Jews and other minorities who are oppressed by Muslims as you do for the oppressed Muslims in Israel! What's the proportion here? I mean, it's okay to treat women like dirt in Saudi Arabia, Iran and about ten other Muslim nations--no cry fowl from you, but dare an Israeli not bend over backwards to accommodate explosive detonating Muslims. . . and BAM! Let the crying begin.

Number of Muslims "oppressed" by Jews: About 6 million.
Numbers of Jews, Christians, Gays, Women, Baha'i, apostates, "witches" and. . .well, everybody who is oppressed by Muslims: Do we even need to count?

If you were at least as obsessed either way, then I'd say, "Nope. She's even-Stephen" But since you ignore some atrocities in favor of others that offend you personally. . . I gotta call hypocrisy.

~Strinv

There is a flaw in your thinking here.
There are only like 6 million jews in israel right?
Muslims are 1.5 billion. Of course they will opress more people total than a small state like israel. That doesn't make it right of course. I just think we need the right perspective. Also I'm not that sure that jewish minorities are being opressed in Iran for instance. They live side by side christians and muslims. Isn't that thought provoking? How can they do that in one of these horrible horrible muslim boogey man nations?

Also it's pretty classy of you to make fun of suicide bombing isn't it?
When you think about it, you'd have to be pretty desperate to sacrfice yourself or your people like that.
 
There is a flaw in your thinking here.
There are only like 6 million jews in israel right?
Muslims are 1.5 billion. Of course they will opress more people total than a small state like israel. That doesn't make it right of course. I just think we need the right perspective.

The right perspective is, inevitably, that Sam is bothered about humanitarian violations against some people, and not against others, who should 'love it or leave it'. In this, she has some company of course.

Also it's pretty classy of you to make fun of suicide bombing isn't it?
When you think about it, you'd have to be pretty desperate to sacrfice yourself or your people like that.

Which is it, though: desperate or deluded? I mean, we hear both things, and all the time - 'he was a madman'; 'he was desperate'. Is it one, or both...or maybe neither?
 
Also I'm not that sure that jewish minorities are being opressed in Iran for instance. They live side by side christians and muslims. Isn't that thought provoking? How can they do that in one of these horrible horrible muslim boogey man nations?
I have a number of friends from Iran. Jewish Iranians are somewhat treated in a similar way that Black Americans are treated in the USA.



I think the only "cure" for the disease is education. Education that Race is a Myth. Education that God is a Myth.
 
Last edited:
The right perspective is, inevitably, that Sam is bothered about humanitarian violations against some people, and not against others, who should 'love it or leave it'. In this, she has some company of course.

I'm botheres about all crimes against humanity. I don't know if you're implying that I'm not.

Which is it, though: desperate or deluded? I mean, we hear both things, and all the time - 'he was a madman'; 'he was desperate'. Is it one, or both...or maybe neither?

I would say a bit of both yes.
 
I have a number of friends from Iran. Jewish Iranians are somewhat treated in a similar way that Black Americans are treated in the USA.

I think the only "cure" for the disease is education. Education that Race is a Myth. Education that God is a Myth.

Yea I agree. I didn't know that jews were treated like black Americans, but I guess it makes sense.
 
Yea I agree. I didn't know that jews were treated like black Americans, but I guess it makes sense.

And I guess you didn't know there are only about 50 000 Jews left in Iran (and dropping), about 1/2 - 1/3 the number that were there prior to 1948, and Iran has an overall population in the range of 70 million+. If there were only 50 000 Palestinians in Israel out of a population of 7 million (5000 if you want to take it in proportion to Iran), there would have been no trouble whatsoever absorbing them into Israeli society. Besides, I haven't heard of Jews in Iran blowing themselves up in marketplaces or calling for strict Jewish laws and customs to be implemented on a national level, nor even for Iran's national laws to treat Judaism with equal value and respect.

Your comparison between the two situations smacks of total mind-numbing ignorance. You judge Iran against Israel based on its treatment of a minority that can be figuratively counted on the fingers of one hand, and even on that count they fail miserably.
 
I think a lot of people will hesitate on the word "mistake". American political language is a volatile stock, and this word can be extremely flammable.

That is, it does seem obvious that incorrect, unsuitable, counterproductive, and all sorts of bad decisions have been made along the way. But "mistake"? Yes, mistakes were made, as the saying goes. But is Israel a mistake?

Well, Israel in particular? Or is there something about Israel that makes it a mistake?

And that is where people get jumpy. Defining the mistake that is Israel generally presents such a challenge that people would rather avoid it.

Why is Israel a mistake?

Because it is Israel?

Because of where it is?

Because of who it is?

Because it is inherently religiously favoritist?

Because it is a bigoted, violative, belligerent state?

I cannot figure to what degree it is simply a headache for most people compared to the equation that goes: Israel = Jews = ain't touching that with a ten-foot pole. But the tangle over what has happened persists. I mean, let's start with that ever-spectral bogeyman, the anti-Semite trying to hide in legitimate politics.

Okay, so Israel is a mistake. Why Israel? Well, because there shouldn't be religious favoritism. Just like there shouldn't be a Muslim state. Well, okay, but what about Ireland?

(What?!)

Yeah, you heard me: What about Ireland?

Something about religious favoritism.

There comes a point at which many people's objections to Israel strike a bit too close to home, and they would have to accept that something they appreciate is likewise invalid.

Surely, though, there is some functional difference between Israel, Iran, and Ireland, for heaven's sake. And, to be certain, there is. But the difference between functional and principled argument is clear; the one is obliged to practicality while the other is not.

But people find themselves scraping together arcane recipes of logic; this amount of this degree of this context, applied in this manner explains why Israel and not Ireland.

And most people don't like to do that.

So the proposition of Israel as a "mistake" is the sort of adventure people look forward to like surfing at the event horizon. One wrong twitch and you're left tumbling uncontrollably into sightless, crushing density.

Very well said. I don't think any reasonable person can pretend Israel is an egalitarian society, or a fully just society, or that it came to possess its territory through unquestionably moral means. Nor can a truly reasonable person say that about the vast majority of countries on this planet, including the "pacifistic" nations of Europe, and most certainly this cannot be said for any of Israel's regional opponents.
 
I wasn't comparing the two. I was commenting on Geoffs post saying that jews were a horribly opressed minority in the entire muslim world.

Please read in context before you call my "comparison" ignorant.
 
Back
Top