Too much fighting on the dance floor

The antisemitism of good intentions, continued: Norman Geras on the Sally Hunt elcubration 123; David-Hillel Ruben's UCU resignation letter; Deborah Lipstadt on YIISA; Petronella Wyatt on dinner table antisemitism. And a footnote from Matt.

Self-hatred: Keith Kahn-Harris on self-hatred; Norm responds.

Leftists who rape, and leftists who excuse rape: Sofie Buckland on Lindsey German and rape-rape: Strauss-Kahn v. Assange; Hugo Schmidt on Germaine Greer on liberal interventionist rape.

Extreme protest: Oliver Duggan on Jody McIntyre and Ron Paul agreeing about Iran. And Gimpy on Brian Haw and the false cures of quackery (h/t Kellie).

Blue Labour: Ed Rooksby on dog whistle politics.

The Middle East: Nick Cohen on an apartheid state.

Bloggery: The Normblog profile of Rob Marchant. Rob blogs here. He also has a nice post on the virtues of "independent bloggers". I was glad to read this: "And Martin in the Margins is a well-read liberal-left independent thinker with no time for lefty dogmas (we need more of those)." And I was also glad to be introduced to Marbury.

And lots more fantastic links from Martin and some Arendtian comment trails from Noga.

Bob's beats: Andrew Calcutt on The Specials' "Ghost Town", thirty years on. More from Kellie, plus a little more Mick Jones.

The Specials - Ghost Town by EMI_Music


Rob Marchant said…
Thanks for the link, Bob, and for reminding me of how much I like the rather underrated Mick Jones. Stay Free, possibly the best Clash song ever.

I too am a bit music-obsessed, Martin and I have recently been swapping notes on Bowie. Where will it all end?
kellie said…
Thanks for linking, Bob.

I'm going to have to put off breakfast after reading the Lindsey German and Germaine Greer stuff. Ecch.
levi9909 said…
The resignation letter you link to contains the following paragraph:

**One part of that working definition rejected by the union stands out: it is anti-Semitic to ‘deny the right of the Jewish people to self-determination’, within some borders, unspecified as what they might be. It is hard for me to comprehend how anyone could consider this relatively anodyne claim as unacceptable, let alone reject it as a current form of anti-Semitism, which it most certainly is.**

The professor has dispensed with the "...taking into account overall context could..." caveat in favour of an assertion of "the right of the Jewish people to self-determination". His reference to borders shows that he must mean statehood but then so does the working definition in its complete form.

As it happens, to argue for such a thing is demonstrably antisemitic in itself but he makes it clear that there is no context by which it could not be antisemitic to argue against or even question "the right of the Jewish people to self-determination".

The letter strengthens the case against the working definition and his description of the zionist project (since that's what he clearly means) as "relatively anodyne" further undermines his argument.

Popular Posts