Is this anti-semitism?

one could argue that even the Democratic party effectively espouses a right-wing worldview

EVEN!

I congratulate the conservatives in that 45% on being intellectually honest.

ha! I have invoked Morbs with the merest mention of the Democratic Party!

or do you just read every thread? because that's possible too.

I think this is a testable research question, actually. I will set to work.

He was posting in this thread earlier today.

I'm just used to him popping up shortly after I say anything that might remotely be construed as controversial. it's cool though, i don't mind. but it's as predictable (I don't mean that in a bad way!) as bar closing time.

baraka seems to say antisemitic things and sympathetic-to-jewish-people in a 1:1 ratio

he was also tight bros w allen ginsberg fwiw

yeah it seems like he was a man of contradictions. got to hand it to the ADL for cherry-picking his statements to make him seem like a total devil.

frankly this sort of clannishness in a pluralistic society like ours feels like a terribly willful and backwards thing to me.

i feel like this is sort of the crux of the thing. you can make all kinds of dialectics + distinctions about the particularistic amid the pluralistic, the chosen ppl out in the diaspora - and there's def a truth to that - but if particularism is willful + backwards, and even terrible, then really the break w/ the community is inevitable.

lol guys, i think Baraka has his redeeming points but let's not gloss over his antisemitism bc it's pretty self-evident and on the record

like if not being a holocaust denier counts as a "sympathetic-to-jewish-people" thing then we're setting the bar super low

are you referring to his 9-11 poem?

yes, but even his supposed repudiation of anti-semitism was really not a repudiation at all

yeah you're roght and I'm not trying to gloss it over

oh i'm sure baraka was among other things an anti-semite, so I'm not really arguing with that, just using his example (a bad one I suppose) to show how the ADL's manipulation of discourse can work.

mordy:
i think there's a not-small difference between impoverished jews living amongst anti-semites in the pale of settlement, or even a bunch of immigrants living in tenements on the LES--- or even people a generation or two removed from these situations -- and the sort of "particularism" I'm pointing out among my relatives and their friends and neighbors. they live in intensely multicultural cities, in fairly wealthy neighborhoods where their neighbors are just as likely to be gentiles as jews, interacting with non-Jews day in and out -- but choosing to extend the hand of close friendship and collegiality primarily to other Jews. maybe they just found themselves there, through the same kind of quasi-invisible pull that draws most of us into the milieu(x) we've found ourselves in. but there are reasons I believe this is not entirely so, from my cousin nearly refusing to hang out with my black friends when he visited me (this is back when we were both in grammar school) to the look of glazed indifference I get from many relatives when I start to talk about anything non-jewish-related for more than a minute...

but there are reasons I believe this is not entirely so

what do you think those reasons are?

jews have been affiliating w/ other jews and identifying w/ others jews throughout jewish history btw - not just during time spent in the pale of settlement.

like if you believe that Jewish identity is entirely a product of circumstances - desperate survival in the face of antisemitism, recent off-the-boat immigrants who only speak yiddish - then you are pretty alienated from Jewishness as I think it has been primarily experienced + practiced. I think there's some truth to the idea that Jewish identity has been constituted by oppression + survival, but I think that is a very small piece of it. there are shared communal/religious/social/etc values + ritual experiences (i think ritual performance is very very constitutive - even just going to synagogue for rosh hashana + yom kippur, let alone celebrating other holidays, passover, shabbat, etc within a community). there is reason to feel that judaism requires an engagement w/ the world and the ppl around u (tikkun olam/birrur nitzitzut/etc) but that's not unanimous within jewish ideology + it doesn't disavow particularism + peoplehood.

wasn't Baraka's first wife Jewish? not that that has much to do with anything.

i'm not consciously following you around, a'tist, u haven't reached that level yet.

Poppy Bush was about 100x harder on Israeli -- let's call them "excesses" -- than Obama has been. Any realistic conservative would take him over that shmendrik Mittens.

say what you will about obama - and i have plenty of complaints about him - he has always been a friend to israel. (i was a little worried when he let kerry loose in the middle east but it turns out that was much ado about nothing.)

sure has! that would be one of my major complaints about him if he wasn't the worst civil liberties president in modern times AND an accomplished war criminal.

yeah, from my perspective obama (like the rest of the presidents dating back--to whom? reagan? nixon?) has been an israel-enabler. (he clearly has a personal antipathy to netanyahu, but that's just good sense.)

also mordy i gave you a hint of my reasons for thinking that my relatives' quasi-exclusionary social milieu is partly willed/willful.

note that I'm not talking about "affiliating w/ other jews and identifying w/ others jews" -- that's to be expected, and certainly not to be disparaged. i'm talking, again, about a milieu in which people's social bonds are all but exclusively among other jews. and these are NOT super-religious people; they are seldom particularly reflective about religious belief or practice. once, when a relative, talking his son and myself out for dinner at disneyland, insisted that I keep kosher alongside them, I asked what the purpose of kosher dietary laws was, and he drew a complete blank.

i guess this all might make more sense if I were to discuss the history of my family, but I don't want to get into that here too much. so probably I'm generalizing from insufficient evidence. (though it's not like my experiences w/ my family haven't been echoed in experiences in hebrew school, hillel, etc.)

anyway, I think it's fair to describe me as alienated from alienated from anything resembling a jewish community, though I would never deny being a Jew and, for reasons I don't entirely understand, am occasionally even proud of this identity.

i think the bare fact that I have been subject to anti-semitism (and certainly heard enough of it, esp. in europe) concretizes my jewish identity, even if i still wouldn't walk into a hillel if you gave me a million dollars.

lol u make me want to invite u over for a shabbos meal

though I would never deny being a Jew and, for reasons I don't entirely understand, am occasionally even proud of this identity.

i find this sentiment very beautiful btw is what i mean

((actually doesn't israel-enabling go back to kennedy? certainly eisenhower was an ambivalent ally.))

ha let's take this thread back to baraka or something so it's not about me. sorry for derail. :(

i'd go to your shabbos if you don't make me feel like a turd for having lost most of my hebrew.

maybe i should just explode this thread with

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HsA1-pS5UGs

V much enjoyed yr thoughts itt tbh

i suppose technically 'israel-enabling' goes back to truman.

(i was a little worried when he let kerry loose in the middle east but it turns out that was much ado about nothing.)

andrew cockburn's harper's piece about kerry in the middle east from a month or so ago is well worth reading btw.

ugh, my harper's sub just elapsed - worth resubbing for?

Is it anti-Semitic to be happy Ariel Sharon is dead?

the article was up free on their website for a while but looks like it isn't anymore. :(

i've kinda been craving chatting about sharon's legacy (i like him a lot, tho i'm not sad he's dead -- he was in a coma for a long time) but i'm not sure it would so satisfying - probably more upsetting

i think being happy that Ariel Sharon is dead is a lot like being anti-Israel - high correlation to anti-semitism but not 100%

I mean, I'm not talking about the 'is it okay to be happy someone dies?' stuff we got with Thatcher. I'm interested in whether or not Sharon was a good man.

what is a good man? i think he was loyal to his ppl and his country and an israeli patriot. it's kinda beside the point whether he's a good man (sabra and shatila certainly suggest that he was, like most military men, not totally in touch w/ value of all human life). his biggest legacy probably going to end up being withdrawal from gaza.

Oh, I have no idea what a good man is. I tend to take it by example :) But my only knowledge of Sharon comes from Waltz with Bashir and pro-palestinian fellow travelers during my activist days.

i think we'd probably find non-overlapping circles for ppl who mourned for arafat and those mourning for sharon

Is it anti-Semitic to be happy Ariel Sharon is dead?

― badgers moved the goalposts (dowd), Saturday, January 11, 2014 5:53 PM (39 minutes ago) Bookmark Flag Post Permalink

i think it's kind of pro-semitic in that it's good the poor guy finally has rest

i mean yeah he was horrible in many ways but i wouldn't wish so many years as a virtual vegetable on my worst enemy

apparently it was his sons that kept him that way against the advice of both doctors and other members of his family

(Jerusalem) – Ariel Sharon died without facing justice for his role in the massacres of hundreds and perhaps thousands of civilians by Lebanese militias in the Sabra and Shatilla refugee camps in Lebanon in 1982. The killings constituted war crimes and crimes against humanity.

Q: Has anyone in history ever been charged with war crimes for allowing someone else's army to commit a massacre?

I'm no Sharon defender, but I think that's a pretty fair question in response to that lede.

sharon "allowed" it to happen in that he instructed the perpetrators of the massacre to go into the camps and restore order, and they did so by massacring civilians

In 1983, a UN commission chaired by Sean MacBride concluded that Israel bore responsibility for the violence.[13]

you don't seem to actually understand Mordy's question

the phalangists were sent in on the orders of the IDF = mordy's question is a nonsequitur

not that this specific argument matters, he was the genocidal leader of a settler state either way

If Sharon was "genocidal" he wasn't very good at it. Do the meanings of words matter to you?

re. "hungry4ass"

yeah I feel like you do violence to the word if you use the word in this context. not everything that is unforgivable and horrible and deliberate and kills a lot of people is a genocide. there has been no systematic attempt to destroy the entire palestinian population in israel, the occupied territories, and/or those in exile in surrounding countries. there has been systematic violence, systematic oppression, rampant violations of human rights, etc.

also i am troubled by the phrase "settler state" since it is hard for me to think of many states that would _not_ fit that description.

as you can see from my comments above i do not think of myself as a "friend of israel" in any of the common senses, but your comment is so hyperbolic that i'm a hairsbreadth from being unable to take your opinions on this matter the least bit seriously. not that you ought to care.

(scarcely possible to take anyone with that screen name "seriously" but anyway)