| Subject: Re: fundamentalism is scary |
Author:
Raisinmom
|
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
Date Posted: 06:49:37 07/15/02 Mon
In reply to:
Astrid
's message, "Re: fundamentalism is scary" on 00:26:07 07/15/02 Mon
>Ah, but don't you view this as in large part a result
>of Sept. 11th? For one thing, I have seen Sharon play
>the terrorism card over and over in order to push the
>limits and still have the support of the Bush
>administration.
I think Sharon is using Sept. 11 as a way to connect to Americans and gain support for his actions, but I don't see it as causing an increase in anti-Semitism. The intifada was the stimulus to Israel's actions, which in turn spurred further Palestinian suicide bombings, which spur further actions, etc. in a vicious circle.
>Scapegoating certainly is often a result of economic
>downturns. Interesting metaphor, btw. So would you
>say that Jews suffer mistreatment during recessions
>because they are so distinctive a group (I would make
>parallels between how Asians are scapegoated in my
>neck of the woods)? And by mistreatment of women, do
>you refer to the domestic sphere or the working sphere?
>
Let me take the last question first. Usually, the mistreatment of women begins in the working sphere (restrictions on what jobs women can hold, education permitted, etc.) and then moves into the domestic sphere (restrictions on what they can wear, inability to complain about domestic abuse, removal of property and inheritance rights).
The other question -- are Jews targeted because they are distinct? -- is a complex one. On one hand, Jews are a distinct group, and the religion stresses the separateness: the kosher laws, the emphasis on being the Chosen People, the circumcision, and all the other things that marks Jews as separate. On the other hand, Jews in Europe and America have been tremendously successful in assimilating, so much so that some Jews now get extremely upset about issues such as intermarriage and "cultural" (rather than religious) Judaism. That Jews have become so enmeshed in their societies, often rising to positions of great power (politically and/or economically, or in terms of popular influence, like successful Jews in Hollywood) paradoxically makes them a target as "infiltrators" and increases the resentment against them. I think your parallel to mistreatment of Asians is an interesting one and shares many of the same characteristics, though Asians have the additional disadvantage of visible difference, while Jews can often "pass" if they want.
>Do you believe the Saudi and Egyptian governments are
>influencing European feelings toward Jews?
Well, sure! They are fanning the flames of anti-Semitic fanaticism in their own people to divert attention from, for example, Saudi corruption. The people, in turn, influence their friends and relatives in Europe. And their press, such as it is, is read outside of their own countries (the Egyptian press, for example, has run some truly disgusting pieces wishing Hitler had "finished the job," etc. -- check out memri.org for some seriously terrifying stuff). In France, for example, the sizeable Arab population is certainly a factor in that country's rising number of anti-Semitic incidents, and I think it entirely possible that they are influenced by events and attitudes in Arab countries, not just in France.
>You might, but John Malkovich wants to kill Robert
>Fisk. And yet I haven't read an anti-Semitic
>statement from him (Fisk), so I have to wonder why
>he'd be so reviled in such a prominent way if
>criticism of Israel is legitimate.
John Malkovich the actor? Well, if he wants to kill Fisk based on this piece, he's just unreasonable. Fortunately, I don't consider him a representative of Jewish thought. Is there a link to the response?
In any event, one guy's unreasonable view does not negate the reams of self-criticism and measured response from countless pro-Israelis. If you just read the NY Times, which Fisk I think mentioned specifically, you'll see plenty of debate -- but all of it of the "Well, I hear your criticism, but here's why you're wrong" variety. And such refutations, even very public or very passionate ones, do not equal saying that the debate is not legitimate.
>But
>the Israeli people elected a war criminal (defined by
>the Israeli people) to lead them. He has been
>applauded for BEING aggressive with the enemy. It
>should be no surprise when left-wingers speak out
>loudy against his policies. Whether he were in Israel
>or in Canada he would attract a higher level of
>scrutiny from the left-leaning media.
Yes, I agree about increased scrutiny. I don't think anyone is surprised -- but again, I have to emphasize that just as it's legitimate to criticize Israel, it's legitimate to defend it.
>There is no denying that an entire population of men,
>women and children are suffering for the political
>actions of some. The Palestinians no longer are even
>able to function in their own territories, let alone
>Israel.
Well, they haven't kicked out Arafat either, have they (instead of cleaving to him in the wake of Bush's call for a new leader)? Or turned Hamas out of the country, or refused to let Hizbollah reimburse the families of suicide bombers? Or turned in the ostensible few terrorists causing all the trouble?
>So, given that we agree that suicide bombing is
>murderous and insane, would you at least agree that
>the Palestinians are oppressed??
Maybe, but I'm not sure where that goes. They are "oppressed" by circumstances (I disagree that they are oppressed by Israel), but then so are lots of other people all over the world. What's the definition of oppressed?
>I mention it [anti-Semitism] again because your response sounded
>emotional ('surprise, surprise') and you stated that
>you didn't finish reading it. It seemed like you were
>dismissing it as hate literature as opposed to a
>reasoned, thoughtful opinion which might be different
>from your own.
Those comments (surprise, surprise) were in my first post, and I subsequently said I did not see evidence that he was an anti-Semite. I think I was very clear that I was dismissing it as a basic anti-Israel piece, not an anti-Semitic piece, and I didn't find it particularly thoughtful. Astrid, you got annoyed when two posters took issue with your initial comment about "how can one country cause so much hate?" And we let it drop when you said you didn't mean it in the way it was taken. So let this drop. I've said several times now that I don't see from this article that Fisk is anti-Semitic, but I do see that he's anti-Israel, and I think he's wrong and the article's arguments are trite. I don't see why being "emotional" indicates that I thought he's an anti-Semite -- can't I be passionate about politics? Can't I believe he is wrong, and be bored by and disdainful of his article, without it being something deeper? Do you see that what you've implied about me or other pro-Israel debaters is itself a bit odd -- that underneath it all, we *must* think everyone who criticizes Israel and to whom we respond strongly is anti-Semitic?
>Actually, I don't often criticise Israel and it would
>probably be more un-PC in my neck of the woods to be
>pro-Israel (not because of any anti-Semitism but more
>because of a strong left-wing and perhaps also
>anti-American sentiment).
Yes, I think that's an interesting point. Do you think some of the Israel/Palestine debate has become enmeshed with anti-American sentiment?
>So you'll forgive me if you think I'm analysing this
>to death, but I am interested in your perspective
>simply because it took me a bit aback. There is a
>sense out there that there is a groundswell of
>anti-Semitic feeling that is gaining in legitimacy in
>the mainstream press, and I'm trying to assess to what
>degree this is actually occurring.
Of course there is nothing to forgive -- it's a debate board! I agree there is the groundswell out there, and I also don't know to what degree it's occurring...I think people are just now starting to try to figure out whether it's occurring at all and in what amount. I think also the Le Pen thing was a bit of a catalyst in the inquiry.
>It was curious that today while I was paying extra
>attention to this (reading Ron Rosenbaum's piece for
>one thing), a couple of things happened. One is that
>a caller on a talk radio show suggested to the Jewish
>host that Jews were responsible for creating
>anti-Christian sentiment in society (!?) and a Jewish
>Canadian man in Toronto was murdered, allegedly by
>skinheads in a racially motivated crime.
>
>It chills me to think that the Second Holocaust some
>are warning against could be even remotely possible.
>
Me too.
[
Next Thread |
Previous Thread |
Next Message |
Previous Message
]
| |
Feedback: 