"Liberal" American Jew equates civic equality with genocide

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.

If Israel holds up a few thousands prosperous Arab citizens (and yes just like blacks in the US, there are thousands of Arabs in Israel who do very well for themselves), your logic says they can't be accused of mistreating their minorities. I say bulls--t to that.

Edit: Looks like I was wrong, a check on Wikipedia suggests the Jewish population of Iran is now down to about 25000, as high as 40000 and as low as 11000, nowhere near the 50000 I quoted. But hey, just like in Borat's Kazakhstan, homosexuals no longer have to wear blue hat! Hooray for equality!
 
Last edited:
Because there are less jews now in Iran, does that make a jew less equal there?

The question you should be asking is why there are so few Jews left there now, especially if you're holding them up as an example of Iranian "tolerance". I guess then based on what you said earlier, anyone other than a neocon ought to think Iran is a "mistake" too?

Edit: BTW Jews aren't the only mistreated minority in Iran, there are other ethnicities, lifestyle choices and religions that have it even worse, but their treatment of Jews seems to be the popular example to focus on, since it's usually brought up in the context of issues relating to Israel.
 
Last edited:
Iran is not an artificial state subsidised by the richest nations of the world. Nor is it a warmongering nation like Israel.
 
Iran is not an artificial state subsidised by the richest nations of the world. Nor is it a warmongering nation like Israel.

Excuse me, what makes Israel any more artificial than Iran? Iran sells oil to the richest nations of the world, Iran buys plenty of top-notch military equipment from Russia and China, and much of that equipment ends up in the hands of murderous Islamic militants in Gaza, Lebanon, Iraq and even Sudan. Not a warmongering nation, you say, even though they spent 10 years trying to replace Saddam Hussein with a Shiite theocracy while indiscriminately bombing Iraqi cities and sending teenagers to run across Iraqi minefields to pave the way for invading troops whenever they'd launch attacks (yes Saddam did bad things to them in kind, just like Israel's enemies have been doing to Israel for 60+ years). Have you even bothered looking at the casualty totals in proportion to the population from all the middle east wars in which Israel didn't have a single soldier involved? Have you ever bothered to check the totals for Palestinians murdered by their own Arab "brethren"? I very much doubt it.

Yeah I definitely think I'll be sticking with the charge of ignorance on your part. Take off the horse blinders and start looking at the big picture, your attempts to single out a small portion of the offenders to the benefit of the remainder makes the conflict worse, not better.
 
People seem to be on the wrong track here. The issue is not Israel or what Israelis think or do - the issue is "liberal" American Jews who equate civic equality for minorities with genocide.

Whats wrong with that picture? Its like "liberal" American black joins the KKK? Huh?
 
Iran is not an artificial state subsidised by the richest nations of the world. Nor is it a warmongering nation like Israel.

Israel isn't artifiial merely existing in violation of international law. there is a group know as jews. hell at one point in time there really was a legally formed state of Israel( though ironically it didn't have Jerusalem as its capital in fact the city wasn't even in the country)
 
I'm botheres about all crimes against humanity. I don't know if you're implying that I'm not.

Not you; that special honour has been demonstrated by others.

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.

+1

People seem to be on the wrong track here. The issue is not Israel or what Israelis think or do - the issue is "liberal" American Jews who equate civic equality for minorities with genocide.

But that's just it: your train is off the track to start with. Cohen is describing the JVP as a secretly genocidal organization, a point your (probably deliberately) selective quoting does not do justice:

“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. “JVP is characteristically slippery on the question of one state or two states,” said Ben Cohen, a writer who has focused on American Jewish responses to Israel. “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.”

Read more: http://forward.com/articles/137016/#ixzz1JmRi7U5V

The problem being that neither you nor they nor anyone else knows what would happen in such a state, although the likelihood is indeed ethnic cleansing against Jews and/or genocide. I would be only too happy to reject such a notion, had it not happened in, you know, all those other states around Israel, and had Hamas no real religious aspirations. Perhaps when those two litmus tests have been passed to anyone's notice. I note you also falsely equate civil liberties with one-state, for the obvious reason.
 
Lets try again:

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.”

What is the communal tent for American Jews? What is the communal tent for JVP?
 
I already asked those questions. You ignored them.

So, definitely try again.
 
The American part of being a Liberal American Jew

S.A.M. said:

People seem to be on the wrong track here. The issue is not Israel or what Israelis think or do - the issue is "liberal" American Jews who equate civic equality for minorities with genocide.

Whats wrong with that picture? Its like "liberal" American black joins the KKK? Huh?

Well, I think part of what you're seeing is an expected result, and that's not a negative thing. The basic paradox you're describing is pretty blatant, so people are grabbing onto things that aren't quite so obviously resolved: Yes, there is something counterintuitive about civic equality equating to genocide.

But here's the thing: Especially for a Jew.

Yes, the cutural allusion is clear, but it is also counterintuitive. That is, we cannot limit an American Jewish identity politic strictly to its Judaism. It is also American, and thus entitled to be as apparently counterintuitive, openly dysfunctional, stupidly anti-American, or otherwise bogglingly self-contradictory as any other identity politic.

It's not fair to the black guy to expect him to view the police department with an automatically cynical eye. It is not fair to the woman to oblige her to feminism. And it is not fair to the Jew to expect the Holocaust to have any logical place in the identity politic. We cannot bind all Jews to Hitler for all time.

We cannot insist that any given Jew always share the picture frame with Hitler and Sharon.

American Jews are American, and one of the great quirks of American culture is that people often come to demand of our American system exactly what they're entitled to, even though they don't actually believe people should have all those rights to begin with. An American is predisposed toward spending what is theirs while saying they shouldn't have it in the first place.

Look at the title of this thread. One can argue the same point on any given day without the words "liberal" or "Jew" in the sentence.

So, first: Yes, people see exactly the problem you're pointing to.

And then: But the phenomenon exists in the American culture regardless of political, cultural, or ethnic identity factors.

That's where you're running into that crippling dissonance. You're not actually supposed to wrap your head around it. The question—

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

—can be written without mentioning Jews. Or blacks, or indigenous tribal descendants.

Or anyone, really, more specifically than Americans. And if we pause to consider the number of people from nations abroad who would disagree with American decadence but also, should circumstance ever find them in such a situation, invoke every last right they could find in the American judicial system civil or criminal, we don't even need to make it about Americans.

Is there not something paradoxical about anyone, anywhere, who might ever have said jack squat about justice ... &c.?

Now, let's just add a bit of sweetener: It's you. Do you really think, in any weather, given so obvious a thread focus and that craven need to find some reason to disagree wtih you ... okay, that's not entirely fair. It only counts for the usual suspects.

But, yes, people are eggshelling it for, well, varius reasons. But it starts with the facts of how obvious is the problem you're referring to, and, well, the fact that it's you, and thus the one thing some folks won't do is simply shrug and move on.
 
Whoa whoa: you're seriously portraying this as a branch of Americanized thought? Do you really think it's time to slap on the stretchy tights for another blind-man's grapple with the coat rack?
 
Good points Tiassa, yes, I see the distinctions you make.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, - not inclusive of blacks, women and Afghan/Iraq "insurgents"

The freedom of expression vs the support for dictators

Free elections = terrorism

Good points all.

But here's the thing: Especially for a Jew.

Yeah which is what I was trying to point out. The notion that civic equality equals genocide. Been there, done that and forgot what it means.
 
Well, I think part of what you're seeing is an expected result, and that's not a negative thing. The basic paradox you're describing is pretty blatant, so people are grabbing onto things that aren't quite so obviously resolved: Yes, there is something counterintuitive about civic equality equating to genocide.

But here's the thing: Especially for a Jew.

We hold these truths to be self-evident, that all men are created equal, - not inclusive of blacks, women and Afghan/Iraq "insurgents"

The freedom of expression vs the support for dictators

Free elections = terrorism

Good points all.

But here's the thing: Especially for a Jew.

Yeah which is what I was trying to point out. The notion that civic equality equals genocide. Been there, done that and forgot what it means.

How do you guys go from Liberal Jews opposing a one-state solution to Liberal Jews opposing civic equality? Sounds like you're both desperate for a reason to lash out. America doesn't want a one-state solution with Mexico, does that mean they oppose civic equality for Mexicans living under their own regime? Does Europe oppose civic equality for Turks because they don't want to share a unified state with them? Does Ireland oppose civic equality for not wanting to go back to a one-state solution with Britain? French Canadian separatists oppose civic equality?

The article is talking about opposition to the one-state solution. You both might think it's clever to tie this to opposition to Palestinian human rights in general, or Arab Israeli rights, but the connection is anything but direct. Sorry to burst your bubbles and knock you off your high horses, but supporting a two-state solution does not equate to racist denial of civic equality, just like support for any other nation's sovereignty on this planet. Try harder next time or maybe focus on the real obvious problems, like West Bank settlements.
 
We're talking about "liberal" Jews in the US under a "communal tent" where one state in Israel - i.e. giving civic equality to native, dispossessed Palestinians spells genocide to them

How does that work?
 
We're talking about "liberal" Jews in the US under a "communal tent" where one state in Israel - i.e. giving civic equality to native, dispossessed Palestinians spells genocide to them

How does that work?

Because they can have civic equality in their own state without displacing 6 million Jews who are also living on their own native lands, that's why.

Edit: And yes now you're going to say the Jews aren't natives to that region, just like Muslims aren't natives to India, but we all know how you like to pick and choose.
 
Because they can have civic equality in their own state without displacing 6 million Jews who are also living on their own native lands, that's why.

True, which is why native Palestinians are not asking for statehood in the Jewish state of US. So why are native American Jews being ethnically cleansed by Palestinians demanding civic equality in Occupied Palestine?
 
True, which is why native Palestinians are not asking for statehood in the Jewish state of US.

Ahhh I see. Hey Tiassa, are you going to back SAM up that I'm a racist if I don't believe Jews are exclusively native to America, and have no right to sovereignty elsewhere? Are you guys once again digging in the sewers looking for a debate you've already had in 100 other formats?
 
Ahhh I see. Hey Tiassa, are you going to back SAM up that I'm a racist if I don't believe Jews are exclusively native to America, and have no right to sovereignty elsewhere? Are you guys once again digging in the sewers looking for a debate you've already had in 100 other formats?

Are you saying that the sovereignty of "liberal" American Jews is determined by the Jewish status of a foreign state? Do you then support the multiple nativities of religious and ethnic groups and their "right" to deny civic equality to minorities?
 
Last edited:
Because they can have civic equality in their own state without displacing 6 million Jews who are also living on their own native lands, that's why.

explain the civic equality of foriegners getting three quarters of your lands that they aren't native to while you get kicked out of that and get to keep one quarter but you don't get your legal right to return to your property?

you can't have equality unless Israel doesn't exist and the palestinian have the chance to return to their property and country.



Your nothing more than a hypocrite. its ok to displace arabs so jews can get what they want but god forbid those people living on land THEY HAVE ZERO LEGAL RIGHT TO have to move so the OWNERS can live o ntheir own fucking property.
 
Back
Top