Israel/Palestine
Related: About this forumBlaming Israel for Palestinian violence is racist: it denies that Arabs are moral agents
There were some odd media reactions this week to the murder of four Jews at prayer (and the heroic Israeli Druze first responder Zidan Saif who tried to rescue them) by two Palestinians perpetrators in Jerusalem.
• The Canadian Broadcast Company tweeted “Jerusalem police fatally shoot 2 after apparent synagogue attack http://ift.tt/1AaVAdn”
• The CNN headline read ‘4 Israelis, 2 Palestinians dead in Jerusalem’ without noting that the two Palestinians were the terrorists. (CNN later apologised. See the memes here.)
• The Guardian altered a Reuters dispatch about the massacre in Jerusalem to remove any reference to Palestinians.
• In the Left-wing Israeli newspaper Haaretz, the writer Amira Hass wrote about "the despair and anger that pushed the Abu Jamals to attack Jews in a synagogue (emphasis added)."
Of course not all reporting was of this character. But still, what explains the exculpatory impulse, also widespread on social media?
more...
http://www.telegraph.co.uk/news/worldnews/middleeast/palestinianauthority/11243168/Blaming-Israel-for-Palestinian-violence-is-racist-it-denies-that-Arabs-are-moral-agents.html
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
upaloopa
(11,417 posts)It is hate vs hate and to take a side condones hate
msongs
(67,442 posts)
King_David
(14,851 posts)And why LOL ?
grossproffit
(5,591 posts)RedstDem
(1,239 posts)pot kettle black........
grossproffit
(5,591 posts)Of course, it's anti Zionism and not anti Semitic *wink* *wink*
shira
(30,109 posts)Here is the Socialist Workers Party theoretician John Molyneux instructing the members in the finer points of reactionary anti-imperialism:
And here is Judith Butler - a professor at Berkeley and one of the most influential academics on the planet – drawing the political conclusions:
What we learnt (again) this week was that the anti-Zionist ideology, the ludicrously simplistic assumptions it makes about Palestinians and Israelis, and the demonising/exculpatory framework through which it distorts our understanding of the conflict, is now bleeding from the cloisters of academia into those wider structures of feeling and patterns of response that shape our public square. A prediction: we ain't seen nothing yet.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Some anti-Zionists are absolutely antisemites; those nitwits who stuffed a pig's head into the kosher food section of that Walgreens in SA, for example. But then, so are many zionists. John Hagee springs to mind as an easy example of that one.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)King_David
(14,851 posts)The Telegraph?
( serious question)
I don't understand what you're trying to say.
King_David
(14,851 posts)Was going to ask you what you meant by that post but was worried if I did ask you I would get a reply like the one I got .
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)shira
(30,109 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)You maybe should have passed it to one of your friends to post.
shira
(30,109 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Can't say anything about the citation from Judith Butler - the video is listed as "private." The bit from Molyneaux is taken from an 8,500 word essay about the role of religion in Marxist theory.
Three-paragraph context of that:
Many other cases can be adduced to reinforce this argument. Where would a socialist be who decided their political attitude to Malcolm X on the basis of his reactionary religious beliefs as a member of the Nation of Islam, to Bob Marley on the basis of his belief in the divinity of that old tyrant Haile Selassie or even to Hugo Chavez on the basis of his self-proclaimed Catholicism and admiration of the pope? Unfortunately some would-be socialists who have no difficulty grasping this in relation to Chavez or Marley, under the pressure of intense bourgeois propaganda are unable to apply the same approach when the religion in question is Islam. To put the matter as starkly as possible: from the standpoint of Marxism and international socialism an illiterate, conservative, superstitious Muslim Palestinian peasant who supports Hamas is more progressive than an educated liberal atheist Israeli who supports Zionism (even critically).
It also follows that Marxist socialists do not accept the idea that any of the major religions is inherently, or in terms of its doctrines, more or less progressive than any of the others. For a religion to become “major”, that is to survive over centuries in many locations and different social orders, it is a precondition that its doctrines be capable of almost infinite selection, interpretation and adaptation. Once again, what is decisive is not doctrine but social base in the specific social situation. Thus in the US we find a right wing racist imperialist Christianity in the Moral Majority or the Mormons and a left wing anti-racist anti-war Christian tradition in Martin Luther King. In South Africa there was a pro-apartheid Christianity and an anti-apartheid Christianity; in Latin America there has been a right wing, pro-oligarchy, pro-dictator Catholicism and a leftist “theology of liberation” Catholicism; and, of course, there are a multitude of different, often sharply conflicting, versions of Islam.
I think that this essay merits a deeper and more intellectual discussion than can actually be had with you as a participant, Shira.
shira
(30,109 posts)We see the same mindset throughout the entire anti-Zio movement:
Based on what I've seen, this is exactly what the vast majority of the anti-Zio BDS movement believes.
Am I right or wrong?
===============
But back to the context.
Hamas is an Imperialist oppresser (seeking an Islamic Caliphate that oppresses pretty much anyone in their way) and yet they are considered by the so-called anti-Imperialist, anti-Zio BDS crowd as preferable to any Zionist.
Care to explain why anti-Imperialists support an oppressive Imperialist outfit like Hamas? And BTW, that batshit insane quote by Judith Butler about Hamas and Hezbollah being considered progressive is absolutely true.
Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)It's like trying to discuss evolutionary biology with Sean Hannity. or any other detailed, complex subject being brought before someone who can only think in catch-phrases and gotcha zings.
shira
(30,109 posts)Scootaloo
(25,699 posts)Just as engaging you on a dense essay about a subject you clearly know nothing about, is a gargantuan waste of time. Especially as you've already decided your position on the topic you know nothing about but want to engage in discussion of.
I'll just once again note the irony of this thread being started by someone who has shown themselves to be utterly incapable of assigning any responsibility to any Israeli for anything, whatsoever.
shira
(30,109 posts)...than even the most liberal minded, atheist Zionists who are outspoken in their criticism of Israeli government policies. This is why criticism of Hamas terror and Hamas supporters is practically unseen within the pro-BDS, anti-Israel Zionist bashing movement. All Zionists bad, Hamas and friends not as bad. So unload against the Zionists 24/7/365.
And you wonder why sane people don't take the anti-Zios seriously.
Major Nikon
(36,827 posts)On Sat Nov 22, 2014, 02:09 PM an alert was sent on the following post:
As i said, it warrants a conversation you're not equipped to handle
http://www.democraticunderground.com/?com=view_post&forum=1134&pid=88336
REASON FOR ALERT
This post is disruptive, hurtful, rude, insensitive, over-the-top, or otherwise inappropriate.
ALERTER'S COMMENTS
Personal attack.
You served on a randomly-selected Jury of DU members which reviewed this post. The review was completed at Sat Nov 22, 2014, 02:16 PM, and the Jury voted 3-4 to LEAVE IT.
Juror #1 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #2 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #3 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #4 voted to HIDE IT
Explanation: Yeah, one of many personal attacks by this poster in this thread.
Juror #5 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: not a personal attack, whimpie alert!!
Juror #6 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
Juror #7 voted to LEAVE IT ALONE
Explanation: No explanation given
