tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post8598181204596373649..comments2024-03-01T08:19:54.547+00:00Comments on BobFromBrockley: Our politics and theirs bobhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15439386754907203808noreply@blogger.comBlogger104125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-57768377511675944792014-04-04T05:23:01.101+01:002014-04-04T05:23:01.101+01:00Nice article
Tri TipsNice article <br /><br /><a href="http://baronta7.blogspot.com/" rel="nofollow"><b>Tri Tips</b></a>Anonymoushttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04039927387474041905noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-53895736441510882882014-02-26T20:22:57.210+00:002014-02-26T20:22:57.210+00:00Ok, so I've now had time to read the comment t...Ok, so I've now had time to read the comment thread. Suffice to say that I don't think that epithets like asajew etc are that helpful frankly. There are lots of people who don't agree with what Israel is doing myself included. I think for some people, because of various reasons, the idea of feeling properly ashamed of our religion does happen, especially when Zionist organizations are sometimes promoted within the community uncritically. <br /><br />I was involved in the Palestine solidarity campaign for a couple of years and I would say that feeling ashamed and personally responsible, was probably one of the reasons I got involved. But, it is not a healthy reason, and mindless self flagellation is not a particularly helpful political path. <br /><br />I would say that there are loads of people within the Jewish community who are disgusted by Israel's actions or at the least are deeply disturbed by them, but they won't get involved in groups like JfJfP or any boycott campaigns, why, because they don't want fuck all to do with those people, because they are quite happy to line up with antisemitic scum or the likes of neturei karta because of their own middle class guilt. Because they're happy to say that antisemitism isn't a thing, because they've never experienced it, or if they have it's not affected their life in any significant way. Like one of the things that annoyed me about PSC when I was a member, there was no attempt to engage with the Jewish community, no attempt to explain why what they were doing wasn't racist, and added to that the tolerance of antisemitic views within the organization, not deliberately, but because people (myself included) wanted to give them the benefit of the doubt or pretend it didn't happen because the rest of what they were doing was something that we agreed with. <br /><br />That doesn't mean to say that everything that PSC etc say about Palestine and Israel is untrue and to be honest I'm equally disturbed by the likes of Stand With Us etc trying to censor debates within the Jewish community, as I am the BDS lobby. But these people feed off of each other, like the Israeli state apologists would never get the support they do were it not for these ideologies, were it not possible to go on any anti Israeli demonstration and hear antisemitic views. But people need to know it's all right to be a Jew and disagree with Israeli government policies, I don't see how the BDS movement and co are helping do that<br /><br />Unlike most of the people on this thread, I'm a somewhat observant Jew, I go to synagogue, I have a lot of Jewish mates, would I bring them to a demonstration against Israel even if we both agreed with it, would I fuck, I don't want to be lectured to by people who have little to no contact with people like me, and be subjected to hearing antisemitic abuse that nobody challenges effectively Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-3595388199916946132014-02-26T16:11:21.404+00:002014-02-26T16:11:21.404+00:00Hi mate that's a very interesting post. Person...Hi mate that's a very interesting post. Personally I have big problems with the BDS movement, the biggest one of course is the fact that it completely ignores the role of the working class. It seems to take a view of Israel which is similar to what the SWP took of it basically saying that the working class of Israel because they were dependent on the state were never going to be broken away from that state and didn't have a hope of being progressive, they used examples such as the Histadrut not allowing Arab trade unionists etc. By basically treating all Israelis in this way, and not making distinctions between the bourgeoisie and proletariat, you can already see how this is gonna be problematic. In addition the BDS movement calls for sanctions, petitioning the ruling class of the EU and the USA to put this on Israel. Let's be honest, who do sanctions hurt the most, they plainly don't hurt the ruling class (think about sanctions on Iraq in the 1990s). Let's think of the countries that they are applied to, for example North Korea, Belarus. Have the dictators of these states been persuaded to change their ways, and in these cases, has anything positive happened to their opponents apart from destitution, political repression and death. NO. Leaving aside the whole question surrounding anti-semitism for now I think the politics are quite reactionary and top-down, it's basically asking corporations and states to do things like divest from Israel, as if asking them to do so, would make them any less scummy. Let's say a company like Sodastream, if it didn't have operations in Israel would they magically become ethical? no. <br />Likewise a lot of campaigning currently centres around G4S and the fact that they work in Israel. What about the work that they do here, detaining refugees, being involved in deaths in custody, their role in policing the DWP and benefit system, and so on. If this company was to divest from Israel would that make everything about them all right? You can see how politically problematic these notions are I think. The other one is the fact that on the British left anyway, there is an obsession with this issue, and the obvious double standards are easy for the Israeli state and its apologists to point out. For example, are there calls for boycotts divestments and sanctions on Ukraine now that neo-Nazis have got their claws into the state? I don't think so, what about China. Nah, didn't think so. To an extent Israel is an easy target. As you say, BDS etc often seems to be more about the people over here than about Israel and Palestine. It becomes a form of identity politics and there's something a bit unsettling, about seeing Jewish people pledging to "hold themselves accountable" over the actions of a state they have no control over. However I must be fair and say that either you, or one of the commenters on your blog, said at one point about how people speak "as Jews" when they hold opinions that aren't agreed with by most of the Jewish people. I don't have much time for a lot of people in, for example JFJFP, but I would say that there would be nothing wrong with holding a different opinion to the majority of Jews (for example radical leftist politics is a minority view to be fair) or anyone else for that matter. And Jews are famous for disagreeing with each other anyway :) However it is quite annoying when the political arguments of many of these people, essentially boil down to finger-wagging guilt trips, and the idea that as Jews we "should have learnt" something from being persecuted. This is ridiculous. Why should we have learnt anything? Victims of persecution often turn to reactionary politics as a result of material conditions or as a result of that persecution. <br />Zionists would argue that they did learn something from all of the persecution, they would argue that they learnt about the need to have a state and defend themselves, so this line of thought is unlikely to convince anyone except the BDS lobby.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-56492175765630059112014-02-08T17:36:58.757+00:002014-02-08T17:36:58.757+00:00This is a comment from The Contentious Centrist th...<i>This is a comment from The Contentious Centrist that got lost in my spam list:</i><br /><br />I noticed that I was the topic of conversation on Levi's terribly enlightening blog. I left a comment in response, not wishing to let a good opportunity for expressing my contentiousness go to waste. But since it is unlikely to be published, levi not being exactly a liberal blogger or suffering much opposition, I am posting it here as well. One reason is that I really like the Aramaic saying I'm quoting and am always happy for a chance to use it for the edification of anti-Zionistas, non-Zionistas, fascistas and just any old garden variety bigots:<br /><br />"[A]n empty cookie jar" would be a very succinct and apt formulation of everything Gert, if only it contained a cent coin in it. I'm thinking of the Aramaic saying: Istera balegina kish kish karia"* which would then almost manage to convey the incandescent intelligence of the author of this felicitous phrase.<br /><br />(*One coin in an empty jar makes a lot of noise)<br /><br />In visiting these blogs on the folded space end of any political position, I am always amazed at how time stands still there, no growth, no progress, no thinking, the same old obsessions dressed in Tratuffian language. As Jane Austen described this stagnant state: "an affectation and a sameness to disgust and weary".bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15439386754907203808noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-35782295855701382092014-02-05T02:41:23.459+00:002014-02-05T02:41:23.459+00:00Brian, yes I do still blog at Jews sans frontieres...Brian, yes I do still blog at Jews sans frontieres.<br /><br />I only remember you from Engage and for some years now whenever I have tried to answer a question put to me at Engage, David Hirsh (I presume) has deleted or at least prevented my answer. Dr Hirsh appears to have a policy of only allowing one dissenter per thread and even then he often deletes their responses without letting other contributors know what he's done.<br /><br />Jim Denham's done the same on his blog but I don't remember you from there.<br /><br />What questions do you have in mind from the past and what question/s did I miss here? I'm usually happy to answer questions but I have a very short concentration span and a tendency to skim so maybe I missed something here.<br /><br />So what are the questions, caller?<br /><br />In the meantime, apologies to anyone who feels I didn't answer a question they put to me.<br />So, what are the questions, caller?levi9909https://www.blogger.com/profile/10553481056544494411noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-60412141615810177542014-02-05T00:11:01.066+00:002014-02-05T00:11:01.066+00:00Tell me Levi9909, are you still connected with &qu...Tell me Levi9909, are you still connected with "Jews sans frontieres An Anti-Zionist blog - browsing the media"? From the nature of your comments, I guess so. <br /><br />We've tangled before, and just like back then, you still don't answer direct questions that demand evidence.<br /><br />No change there, then.Brian Goldfarbnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-85749058779446660402014-02-04T08:53:35.843+00:002014-02-04T08:53:35.843+00:00Nah, I just comment here and there, usually on Rod...Nah, I just comment here and there, usually on Rodent's place but on a few other places too, Bensix's for one. I was only ever really an AaroWatch commenter too, that was my only above the line post. organic cheeseboardnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-19265090835105972782014-01-31T14:08:13.028+00:002014-01-31T14:08:13.028+00:00Organic Cheeseboard - I read your review of Finkle...Organic Cheeseboard - I read your review of Finkler Question. I wish I'd read it before I read the book. I still would have read the book for the same reason I read Atzmon's stupid book but I would have noticed things in Jacabson's book that I didn't notice before.<br /><br />Do you actually blog anywhere these days?levi9909https://www.blogger.com/profile/10553481056544494411noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-220242856244562652014-01-31T13:05:47.359+00:002014-01-31T13:05:47.359+00:00"... and I’m willing to bet cash money that t..."... and I’m willing to bet cash money that the Klugs and Roses hang out with a lot more Jews than I do."<br /><br />Reminds me of another Seinfeld moment when George, who feels he might be accused of racism, goes to an unusual amount of trouble to find an African-American to take to lunch. Sometime friendship evolves around a mutual interest and sometimes it evolves around a mutual narcissistic need. The latter can be called the fig-leafing anomaly.<br /><br />Arendt's ruminations about the parvenu may also be instructive here.The Contentious Centristhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07370528817706233156noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-51360843259018393312014-01-31T12:29:56.607+00:002014-01-31T12:29:56.607+00:00Gosh, I just read the whole of the Butler sentence...Gosh, I just read the whole of the Butler sentence I quoted second hand: "Called by an injurious name, I come into social being, and because I have a certain inevitable attachment to my existence, <b>because a certain narcissism takes hold of any term that confers existence</b>, I am led to embrace the terms that injure me because they constitute me socially." <br /><br />Narcissism again, as well as attachment. bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15439386754907203808noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-45847701169364771182014-01-31T09:31:55.709+00:002014-01-31T09:31:55.709+00:00calling someone “asaJew” might be a form of anothe...<i>calling someone “asaJew” might be a form of another rhetorical fallacy, what we call “ad hominem”</i><br />I don’t think it is. <br /><br />If you say someone’s argument is wrong <i>because</i> they are Jewish that’s ad hom. But the “asaJew” accusation is not about the Jewishness of the speaker but about <i>the content and form</i> of actual their argument, and specifically about the prefacing of it with the words “As a Jew”. <br /><br />Organic Cheeseboard said “<i>On this very thread you claim that [the term “asaJew”]’s specifically designed to demonstrate that the person is not an 'authentic' Jew</i>” (Note the quote marks around “authentic’.) I asked where I do that and s/he said here: “<i> Some anti-Zionist Jews today express their Jewishness primarily through their hatred of Israel</i>” (Note I also made a parallel claim, that other attenuated Jews invest in antisemitism as the primary way of expressing their Jewishness). Is that the same thing? It really doesn’t look like it to me. I don’t think I’ve made any claim on what <i>is</i> authentically Jewish or not; negative attachment to Israel, fighting antisemitism or fighting Jewish injustice may well be authentically Jewish. What I’m drawing attention to is the way the “speaking as a Jew” claim (Mary Kay Wilmer: Jews have a unique responsibility etc; Howard Cooper: these are the true Judaic values and those who don’t follow them are bad faith Jews) is a claim about what’s authentically Jewish. Isn’t this clear?bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15439386754907203808noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-26395046335962502802014-01-31T09:21:00.824+00:002014-01-31T09:21:00.824+00:00So:
”I also see absolutely on evidence for your st...So:<br /><i>”I also see absolutely on evidence for your stereotyping these people as JC-obsessed or whatever else. If anything they're almost certainly in a very similar situation to you regarding intellectual activities. Most of the prime violators are LRB contributors for instance. “</i><br />I don’t think they’re JC-obsessed; I said my hunch was they live in a JC world. Maybe you’re right and my hunch is wrong. But Cooper is actually a rabbi in Finchley and I’m willing to bet cash money that the Klugs and Roses hang out with a lot more Jews than I do. I presume that people that go to Jews for Justice for Palestinians meetings are mostly Jewish. I’m fairly sure that if you mapped the addresses of Independent Jewish Voices signatories and Jewish LRB contributors you’d not find many SE postcodes. (Possibly if I lived in their world, I’d feel more like them: Tony Lerman is understandably embittered by his experiences as a communal activist, for example.) <br /><br />I concede, though, that there’s nothing wrong with wanting to have their views aired in their union or in a liberal newspaper. My question remains, though: why is the Guardian or UCU so keen to listen? Why should their obsession take up so much space in the general left-wing public sphere? <br /><br />The argument that Israel is somehow closer to home and therefore a more appropriate target for our anger is a stronger one, and the North Korea torture example is a good one. But I still think Israel gets a lot of anger and attention that other of our close allies don’t get. The Commonwealth, headed by our own Queen and (I think) mostly funded by British taxes, is currently chaired by Mahinda Rajapaksa, probably guilty of war crimes against Tamils that dwarf Israeli war crimes in the parallel period. Turkey is a close ally of ours – it is a NATO member, we are its second biggest trade partner, we have supported its EU accession – and yet, apart from the glamour of Gezi Square, the British left ignores the systematic denial of key collective rights to Turkey’s ethnic and national minorities as well as recent intense repression of internal democracy. The biggest recipients of UK aid are Pakistan and Ethiopia (both among the US top aid recipients) and Nigeria. Of these, Pakistan is a state that, like Israel, is founded on ethnoreligious exclusion and continues to systematically discriminate against non-Muslims and to deny ethnic minorities such as Balochistan any real self-determination. Ethiopia’s treatment of its indigenous people – the violent “villagisation” programme – compares unfavourably with Israel’s treatment of the Bedouin; its repression of its Muslim population is also systemic. Nigeria cannot be seen as systemically racist, but the level of human rights abuses there are shocking, including the state persecution of homosexuals. None of these outrages get any mention at UCU congresses. So I think something other than being a UK ally is behind the unique heat Israel gets. bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15439386754907203808noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-58071607540629309932014-01-31T09:20:24.952+00:002014-01-31T09:20:24.952+00:00Sarah and I (although she’s much nicer and more th...Sarah and I (although she’s much nicer and more thoughtful than me) are often accused, by both our friends and our enemies, of being too nice, too polite, or too generous to people that don’t deserve it, or simply of sitting on the fence. When we (especially me) attempt to caveat and qualify our positions, we are accused of twisting and turning, of slipperiness and dissembling. Those are probably all character flaws, so Organic Cheeseboard may be insulted rather than complimented when I thank her/him for her/his mode of argument here, showing that it is possible to be robust and rigorous and contentious without resorting to personal insult. <br /><br />Almost all the rest of us in thread (including myself) have been personally insulting to others in the thread, some more extravagantly than others. While some of these insults may have been accurate (the ones I made obviously were), it’s clearly not conducive to meaningful and productive debate. <br /><br />Some people are obviously not interested in coming to any kind of reasoned conclusion, but engage in argument for sheer fun or with destructive intent. And anyone who sees their interlocutor as an incorrigible racist (charlatan or otherwise) is right to have destructive intent and should keep at least a barge pole length away from the discussion. (Indulging alleged racists with reasoned argument is precisely why Sarah and I are told off by our friends.) <br /><br />But for me personally the issues raised in this thread matter, and are worth reasoning out (and I’ve modified my original position as a result of Organic Cheeseboard’s and Flesh’s interventions). And if they’re worth reasoning out, they must be worth the effort at civility. So, if this thread continues: a plea for civility. <br /><br />Probably the thread has run its natural course, but there are a couple of things I still want to think through…bobhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15439386754907203808noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-37899106566916591992014-01-30T19:36:30.637+00:002014-01-30T19:36:30.637+00:00Commenting on one of Bob's threads about Israe...Commenting on one of Bob's threads about Israel always ends up in this kind of fiasco; there is always a certain kind of extra large and stinky spitball reserved for a Zionist* followed by the usual mitigations. <br /><br />* An Israeli Jew, no more no lessThe Contentious Centristhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07370528817706233156noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-36353558559905704482014-01-30T19:00:26.325+00:002014-01-30T19:00:26.325+00:00I did not pick up on any problem in Flying Rodent&...I did not pick up on any problem in Flying Rodent's rat comments. On reflection I can see why this seemed problematic (I asked my husband just now what animal he associated with antisemitic tropes and he immediately said 'rats') but I still see this as an unfortunate coincidence. I don't remember Ben Six commenting much about Israel but he has addressed antisemitism on his blog.SarahABUKhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/02162666068166925393noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-61415646518034759142014-01-30T12:20:06.929+00:002014-01-30T12:20:06.929+00:00Does it really matter, bensix?
Your rush to jump...Does it really matter, bensix? <br /><br />Your rush to jump in to defend Rodent's fondness for iffy metaphors suffices to understand what you are: a giddy, insolent leftist quite beside himself with sneering contempt for Israeli Jews and (inevitably) admiration for himself and his own tribe. That is all I need to know. 983348 7<br /><br />I'll let you have the last word.<br /><br /><br /><br />The Contentious Centristhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07370528817706233156noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-62244909876484165752014-01-29T23:37:21.661+00:002014-01-29T23:37:21.661+00:00And here I thought you were such a glutton for uni...<i>And here I thought you were such a glutton for universalism!</i><br /><br />You were wrong. I'm not a universalist. Might I suggest that your telepathic abilities are less sophisticated than you seem to think?BenSixhttp://bensix.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-81743310147935868662014-01-29T20:56:41.614+00:002014-01-29T20:56:41.614+00:00"there are a lot of very belligerent enthusia..."there are a lot of very belligerent enthusiasts on both sides who don't particularly care whether any points made are reasonable or insane. Thus, endless, bitter fights. "<br /><br />Something tells me that Rodent is not really awake to the dramatic irony encapsulated in this statement. Which is one reason why I cannot not at all see him joining "a long tradition of extending metaphors for comic effect". Merely a mean-spirited attempt to smear a good man and a thoroughly decent and scrupulous thinker without the risk of confronting him. <br /><br />Ben Six: Do you think "we" have an exclusive monopoly on comic metaphors? Your tribal naivete is quite touching. And here I thought you were such a glutton for universalism!The Contentious Centristhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07370528817706233156noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-76238719942352916372014-01-29T17:57:24.538+00:002014-01-29T17:57:24.538+00:00Well, we appear to be going nowhere fast here so I...Well, we appear to be going nowhere fast here so I'll wrap my contribution up: <br /><br />I don't remember many complaints among lefty panickers about relativism etc. back when e.g. claims were being made that "Neocon" was a codeword for "Jew" rather than the more likely "enthusiast for extreme violence in foreign policy", or when folk were saying - entirely correctly - that terms like "ZioNazi" weren't acceptable, because they were basically highly-whiffy boo-words with very dodgy overtones. <br /><br />I think we can imagine what reception any reversed version of the As a Jew insult would get, with similar connotations directed at Israel enthusiasts instead of antis. <br /><br />I think there would be none of this prevarication or counter-accusation at all, and there;d be precious little of the type of "I bet you don't get all antsy about Muslims doing racism as well isn't that very suspect" guff, and so on. <br /><br />I think we'd find out in no short order that anyone using such dubious slurs to describe people with our host's politics was actually a moral monster, and that any attempts that were made to do what Bob is basically doing here - saying <i>Because I don't like these people or the things they do and say, it is thus fine to use really quite nasty boo-words about them</i> would suddenly become despicable justification for racism. <br /><br />I also think it should be very, very difficult to deny this, but I'm experienced enough in these internet squabbles to realise that loads of people will. <br /><br />Because the iron rule is, fine for me but not for thee. That's hardly limited to issues like this, but it is particularly prevalent in issues like this.<br /><br /><i>...for me, the reason why people focus on Israel more than, say, Assad is because the Israeli govt is a very close ally of the UK, where Assad is an enemy.</i><br /><br />I think it's simpler than this, OC - it's just very difficult to get a good, angry argument going over whether Assad is a bad guy, because 99% of the UK's population think he is one and won't argue the point*. <br /><br />On the other hand, it's <i>very easy indeed</i> to get into a fight over Israel and the Palestinians because there are a lot of very belligerent enthusiasts on both sides who don't particularly care whether any points made are reasonable or insane. Thus, endless, bitter fights. <br /><br />*There are some fuds who would argue, but they're a vanishingly slim section of the populace and barely worth worrying about.flyingrodenthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/12560266705069504771noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-48875806542971998052014-01-29T15:59:41.505+00:002014-01-29T15:59:41.505+00:00Contentious Centrist -
No doubt Rodent was unawar...<b>Contentious Centrist</b> -<br /><br /><i>No doubt Rodent was unaware of what he was working with but as Freud tells us, nothing we say is ever purely random...</i><br /><br />Of course it wasn't "random". Y'see: ol' FR was writing about suspicion and "smell a rat" is by far the most ubiquitous idiom that refers to this sense. As for "palpable relish and lip-smacking pleasure": you might not be aware of this but we have a long tradition of extending metaphors for comic effect. Have a read of Wodehouse sometime. You might enjoy it.<br /><br />Honestly, whether it is a pro-Israel Conservative or a left-wing third worldist it does my head in when people scrutinise each rhetorical flourish for signs of Nazism bubbling to the surface. Judging people by their actual opinions tends to be more useful and interesting than by their informal prose but, damn, it certainly is harder when you have to think about the real world and not the potential implications of an idiom.<br /><br />BenSixhttp://bensix.wordpress.comnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-79794739980958674672014-01-29T15:08:50.628+00:002014-01-29T15:08:50.628+00:00"Some anti-Zionist Jews today express their J...<br />"Some anti-Zionist Jews today express their Jewishness primarily through their hatred of Israel"<br /><br />How is this an ad-hominem?<br /><br />If I were to say that a certain review of Jacobson's book is worthless because the author is an anti-Zionist who would tear apart any novel which made fun of anti-Zionists, that would be an ad-hom. Because the politics of a writer may not be relevant to an evaluation of his literary acumen. <br /><br />If I were to say that some book reviewers who are tasked with reviewing a novel which mocks anti-Zionists are likely to filter their literary acumen through that particular political prism, how is that an ad-hom? <br /><br />If Judith Butler were to review Jane Austen's Pride & Prejudice and found that Elizabeth is complicit in patriarchy, I would be absolutely within my rights as a critical reader to say that her review of the novel was directly related to her own particular understanding of gender theory, because ... <br /><br />Some feminist writers today express their feminism primarily through their hostility to what Jane Austen represents to them. <br /><br />Is this an ad-hom?The Contentious Centristhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07370528817706233156noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-33854514030490597162014-01-29T14:24:38.362+00:002014-01-29T14:24:38.362+00:004. To Rodent (and Bob): using an extensive rat m...4. To Rodent (and Bob): using an extensive rat metaphor when speaking with loathing about Jews, one certain Jew or Zionism cannot be dismissed as pure coincidence. Of the thousands metaphors that he could have used Rodent’s mind alighted on this one and not just inserted as “to smell a rat” but rather delighting in slathering it on beyond its mere metaphorical value. No doubt Rodent was unaware of what he was working with but as Freud tells us, nothing we say is ever purely random. I would urge Rodent to be a little more judicious in his choice of metaphors. Or perhaps, more self-aware?The Contentious Centristhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07370528817706233156noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-70624152781309793712014-01-29T14:24:02.310+00:002014-01-29T14:24:02.310+00:001. The origin of Butler's quote (needless to a...1. The origin of Butler's quote (needless to add I rather detest Butler) is Hannah Arendt's quote:<br /> "In a society on the whole hostile to the Jews . . . it is possible to assimilate only by assimilating to anti-Semitism also."<br /><br />2. The gist of Yiddish phrase you quote whose meaning I can only guess is found in variations like: "you don't wash your dirty laundry in public" or "pas avant les domestiques". The implication is that there are some family secrets so embarrassing that they should not be aired in public but sorted out within the milieu they pertain to. Asajews pride themselves on beating this "taboo". In their eyes they are tantamount to whistleblowers for whom the principle is so much more binding than loyalty to the tribe. A noble sentiment, indeed, that explains why these Jews are considered courageous by those whom these "secrets' are best served (ex. Peter Beinart and his Open Zion fiasco). There is something quite intoxicating in it for the asajews who suddenly find themselves nearly beatified by the very society that was subtly close to them before. A thought occurs to me that this feebleness of will should act as a warning alert that perhaps those who speaks "as Jews" do not speak as Jews at all. To speak as Jews is to speak for Jews is to understand what it means to be a Jew in this world, beyond antisemitism, Zionism, etc. The Asajew adheres to historical phenomenon like the medieval Pablo Christiani rather than the Spinoza that they all fancy themselves to be. In what way? Christiani was a rabbi who converted to Catholicism when persecution of the Jews was a matter of religious and civic duty. Thereafter, he spent his time forcing Jews to listen to his sermons as they congregated in their synagogues for Sabbath. He thought converting was so much better for Jews than remaining Jews. Roughly you can compare his motivation to that of asajews who think that Jews without Israel would be so much better off because it works for them, personally. But of course as Christiani was dead wrong in his prescriptions for Jewish happiness so are these asajews. To quote Arendt again:<br />"The specifically Jewish humanity signified by [Jewish] worldlessness was something very beautiful...this sundering aside of all social connections, the complete open-mindedness and absence of prejudice that I experienced...One pays for liberation... this humanity... has never yet survived the hour of liberation, of freedom, by so much as minute" You see, that has also happened to us.<br />Gaus: You wouldn't like to undo it?<br />Arendt: No. I know that one has to pay a price for freedom."<br />3. I wish those asajews who think they embody the ethics of Spinoza or Arendt would actually make the effort to read and study them in some depth. The "inconsistencies" they will find there ought to put to shame their own undentable certainties about the right way of being a Jew, or a human being (the two are interchangeable). <br />When I encounter asajew or his enthusiastic non-Jewish supporter, I tend to feel like I do when I try to have a rational conversation with an ultra-orthodox Jew about military service in Israel or the place of women on a Mehadrin bus, or a devout Catholic about the idea of Christ as God: panic and claustrophobia. There is one difference, though: The latter two do not threaten my very existence as a human being. And they are so much humbler than the asajew.<br />The Contentious Centristhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07370528817706233156noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-50264277607448178002014-01-29T12:01:01.738+00:002014-01-29T12:01:01.738+00:00Sarah - It's better to deal with what people a...Sarah - It's better to deal with what people are actually saying than attacking them on the combined grounds of their argument and their ethno-religious background but I think it makes a big difference that the likes of Loonwatch are defending the marginalised and a community against the mainstream whereas Bob, HP, Norm, Engage, etc, are defending the mainstream and a state against the marginalised. But whatever the position of the people essentialising largely hereditary identities, it's the implied essentialising that brings us into racist territory.<br /><br />In the instance of this post though there are other issues of presumptuousness and inconsistency/hypocrisy. Maybe it's a minor example but David Hirsh seems to upload a "selfie" every time he gets his hair cut and yet it's the people he's denouncing who are narcissists.<br /><br />Does no one have a moral motive for denouncing western wars and a colonial settler state?Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-10131050.post-81887054600731511532014-01-29T11:46:38.966+00:002014-01-29T11:46:38.966+00:00Perhaps we can compromise to substitute for "...<i>Perhaps we can compromise to substitute for "Asajew" Howard Jacobson's much more pertinent term "Ashamed Jew"</i><br /><br />perhaps not. The worst part of one of the worst novels I've ever had the misfortune to read. My review here:<br /><br />http://aaronovitch.blogspot.co.uk/2011/01/finkler-question.html<br /><br />Jacobson's thinking on the matter (all anti-Zionist Jews hate their dad LOL) would be laughable if it wasn't so embarrassing. <br /><br />onwards.<br /><br /><i>calling someone “asaJew” might be a form of another rhetorical fallacy, what we call “ad hominem”. </i><br /><br />There's no 'might' about it. it is an ad hominem. <br /><br /><i>Where do I do that? </i><br /><br />here:<br /><br /><i>Some anti-Zionist Jews today express their Jewishness primarily through their hatred of Israel</i><br /><br />and elsewhere too. <br /><br />FR says:<br /><br /><i>this is my fault, because I happened past your post not long after rereading an old post of mine where the issue came up but I didn't take it up with anyone directly. </i><br /><br />ditto - the phrase has been bugging me for a while but i don't have a blog so haven't had the opportunity to discuss it. <br /><br /><i>it is the lecturing at Jews (albeit in front of non-Jews, on Radio 4 or in the Guardian) that is the particular offence of the Coopers and Roses.</i><br /><br />I'll sound like a broken record here, but i really don't understand how this is different from, say, Zach Braff advocating for Israel on the basis of his Jewishness, also for a primarily non-Jewish audience. <br /><br />But you do 'sort of' address this:<br /><br /><i>Right-wing Zionists being right-wing wankers is just normality, to be expected.</i><br /><br />Certainly for Norm, and indeed for Hirsh, 'asaJews' being wankers is the norm surely. I mean Jacobson, in his horrifically shit book, even has one of them a *literal* wanker - documenting his attempts to grow his foreskin back. <br /><br />I also see absolutely on evidence for your stereotyping these people as JC-obsessed or whatever else. If anything they're almost certainly in a very similar situation to you regarding intellectual activities. Most of the prime violators are LRB contributors for instance. <br /><br /><i>What's less OK is when they take that rage into a wider public world - Comment is Free, Radio 4, UCU union.</i><br /><br />I'm a UCU member and oppose the boycott - just wanna get that one out of the way. But I still don't see what the problem is with people wanting to have their political views aired - especially if they feel they're being unfairly represented. Why shouldn't these people write for CiF or speak on Radio 4? What's the problem with it? You've never fully said. The whole point of their citing their background in these pieces is to make it clear that they're 'bucking the trend' and not representative of all UK Jews - but that's their point - and your idea seems to be that the trend of pro-Israel advocacy should continue with no dissent, and I really can't understand it. WHY is this 'less ok'? <br /><br />This is now a side note but still - for me, the reason why people focus on Israel more than, say, Assad is because the Israeli govt is a very close ally of the UK, where Assad is an enemy (not that this stopped Tony Blair having him to stay, but hey). It's natural and I think right for Britons to expect our allies to operate in a more accountable manner than our enemies. Yet Israeli crimes have in recent history been actively indulged by our government - a government that is meant to have Israel's ear. We're far more closely allied as a nation with Israel than Palestine and have regularly sided with the USA in vetoing UNSC attempts to criticise the actions of the Israeli government. <br /><br />It's why I, for one, also get more upset with evidence of the UK's complicity in torture than the myriad tortures enacted by the North Korean regime. organic cheeseboardnoreply@blogger.com