The rabbi who interviewed Helen Thomas…
…explains what led up to it, and what it’s like living in a post-“oooh” world.
The New Neo
A blog about political change, among other things
…explains what led up to it, and what it’s like living in a post-“oooh” world.
While there are legitimately many people who are anti-Israeli-policy, not anti-Jew, it does seem that whenever the box is shaken, a lot of folks who claim that turn out to have been lying. To us or themselves – doesn’t matter.
AVI, I would agree with your statement if you would replace “many” with “few.” And the few would be Jews, and only the Orthodox at that.
What does it mean to be anti-Israeli policy? Where does that put one? Against the rule of law, democracy, tolerance . . . and for the lies that only started since 1967 when the Muslims strategy became to win through slander because they could not win by overwhelming strength. Reminds me of Balak and Bilam.
What is one legitimate reason (other than the Orthodox objection against Zionism without the Messiah) to be anti-Israeli policy?
As has been pointed out many times, if the Arabs put down their arms, there would be peace in the Middle East. If the Israelis put down their arms, there would be no Israel.
When Iran gets the bomb, Israel’s days are numbered. That appears not to bother the current administration.
Maybe we should qualify our definitions.
Is it possible to love Israel and be anti-Israeli-policy? Absolutely; ask any Israeli. (Israelis are notoriously cynical about their politicians, and have good reason to be.)
Being critical of this or that Israeli policy is not evidence of antisemitism. Israelis are all too human, and Israeli policies have been flawed, as you’d expect of any government composed of imperfect human beings.
So when does criticism of Israel cross over into antisemitism? In my opinion, this can take several forms.
If you criticize all Israeli policies, then you’re being prejudicial — and not necessarily antisemitic, but not far at all from it. (Nobody is wrong all the time. If you think Israel can do nothing right, when other countries are right now and then, if only by accident, then you need to wonder why you think Israel is an exception.)
If you criticize Israeli policies — but fail to criticize similar or worse policies elsewhere — then you’re being hypocritical, holding Israel to a higher standard than other countries. This too is not by definition antisemitic, but it’s awfully easy to cross over the line from there. (Is there a reason, any reason at all, to hold Israel to a higher standard that does not involve Judaism?)
And if you do not accept the right of Israel to exist, as a homeland for a Jewish people desperately in need of one — but have no problem with the multitude of Christian countries, Muslim countries, Buddhist countries, Hindu countries, and so on — then you are denying Jews the right to defend themselves in a hostile world. And that is antisemitic.
Here’s a touchstone. When a person claims to be anti-Zionist, but not antisemitic, ask what Israel could do to redeem itself in their eyes. If they claim that it must cease to exist as a Jewish state — or cease to exist altogether — then ask if they also want to dismantle Anglican England, or Muslim Saudi Arabia, and for the same reasons. If they do, ask why they insist that Israel must go first.
This quickly demonstrates whether you’re speaking to a person reachable by reason or not. (Although frankly, for that, the first question is enough.)
respectfully,
Daniel in Brookline
I thought the article was rather lame. And way too long for just one point, the “post-oooh world”.
Daniel – well summarised.