The BDS movement and the association of anti-Zionism and antisemitism

[Pannonian]

I'm not sure what boycotting universities is supposed to achieve but being opposed to Israel's politics is not necessarily anti-semitism either way.

I'm as exasperated by British Islamists as I am puzzled by Israel's influence in the US. I guess this makes me an anti-semite on both sides of the Israel-Palestine divide.

[Husar]

But only caring about Israel makes it very likely.

My personal theory that I can't back up and you are allowed to mock me. I think that the real reason is that Israel has succes, it has universities that rank among the best in the world, innovative industry, compatitive economy. That's got to be a bit hard to explain when you are ideologically infused with the idea, or rather truth that all cultures are equal. The palestianes get more aid than any 'country' in the world and it's a mess. So, lefties simply can't get to terms with being wrong.

Fire away

There are people who are as unreasonable as you say but there is no reason to devote 90% of your posts to a tiny weirdo minority that has barely any impact and treat them as though they dictate all politics in the west. Doing that is unreasonable as well, it's like an unhealthy fixation.

I'm as exasperated by British Islamists as I am puzzled by Israel's influence in the US. I guess this makes me an anti-semite on both sides of the Israel-Palestine divide.

It's a fact that Israel keeps taking land that Palestinians occupy and I haven't seen any arguments as to why that would be okay to do. The only "counter argument" is usually a distraction like "but the Palestinians..." which always ends in that two wrongs do not make a right.

If Israel has the right to take land from its neighbors as long as it can by being militarily stronger, then what about Germany occupying some polish and dutch border towns to settle German people there? Would that be okay? The dutch don't even have tanks anymore to oppose us, that will be easy...

Taking that land is not a defense against rocket attacks and suicide bombers either so that's certainly not a justification, they may justify setting up checkpoints and other measures but not land grabs beyond the borders accepted by the UN.

[Pannonian]

It's a fact that Israel keeps taking land that Palestinians occupy and I haven't seen any arguments as to why that would be okay to do. The only "counter argument" is usually a distraction like "but the Palestinians..." which always ends in that two wrongs do not make a right.

If Israel has the right to take land from its neighbors as long as it can by being militarily stronger, then what about Germany occupying some polish and dutch border towns to settle German people there? Would that be okay? The dutch don't even have tanks anymore to oppose us, that will be easy...

Taking that land is not a defense against rocket attacks and suicide bombers either so that's certainly not a justification, they may justify setting up checkpoints and other measures but not land grabs beyond the borders accepted by the UN.

See the argument I summarised above, that IIRC I've seen Frag or someone trot out here as well. "Palestinians" don't exist. The land was split into various states, one of which was Jordan, and so-called "Palestinians" are really Jordanians who have no right to any disputed land because they belong to a foreign state and not a disputed state. And since they don't exist, they don't exist to dispute the land, and thus Israel is merely holding what is her territory by right and without dispute. That's what I mean by 1984 and Communism. Nazism would preach hatred against its enemy. 1984-style Communism refuses to recognise their existence.

[Husar]

See the argument I summarised above, that IIRC I've seen Frag or someone trot out here as well. "Palestinians" don't exist. The land was split into various states, one of which was Jordan, and so-called "Palestinians" are really Jordanians who have no right to any disputed land because they belong to a foreign state and not a disputed state. And since they don't exist, they don't exist to dispute the land, and thus Israel is merely holding what is her territory by right and without dispute. That's what I mean by 1984 and Communism. Nazism would preach hatred against its enemy. 1984-style Communism refuses to recognise their existence.

Ah yes, but this still doesn't explain how this is Israel's land when the UN decided it is not. The USA wouldn't just let Russia occupy all of Antarctica just because Jordan has not claimed any of it. You may be right in that is what people do but it still doesn't work out that you expel people from the land they've been living on possibly for centuries based on your personal recategorization of their nationality.

I want to see a proper argument and "they're Jordanians because I say so" is not a proper argument.

[Rhyfelwyr]

Since BDS says that it calls for a boycott of Israeli academic institutions that discriminate against Palestinians, rather than simply any academic of Israeli citizenship, I would agree that it is not anti-semitic, on those grounds at least.

See the argument I summarised above, that IIRC I've seen Frag or someone trot out here as well. "Palestinians" don't exist. The land was split into various states, one of which was Jordan, and so-called "Palestinians" are really Jordanians who have no right to any disputed land because they belong to a foreign state and not a disputed state. And since they don't exist, they don't exist to dispute the land, and thus Israel is merely holding what is her territory by right and without dispute. That's what I mean by 1984 and Communism. Nazism would preach hatred against its enemy. 1984-style Communism refuses to recognise their existence.

Well, as far as I understand it, Palestinian nationalism is a fairly modern creation, as are all the nationalisms based around Arab states carved out rather arbitrarily by the colonial powers less than a full century ago.* I think that in pointing this out, these "1984-style Communists" are trying to win the argument over historical legitimacy, rather than denying that a real Palestinian nationalism exists today (though some may do this, such thinking is not the natural conclusion of the 'historic legitimacy' argument more generally). I think a more interesting line of thought would be to look into the development of the modern, Zionist form of Israeli nationalism, and challenge just how solid its own historic foundations are.

*Surely both sides should show some nuance here, and recognize that while (Arab) Palestine cannot claim to be the continuation of some sort of long-term historic state/people, Palestinian nationalism does have some historic precendents in more general pan-Arabism. Certainly, it could be seen in the revolts against the Ottomans.

[Husar]

There's still the notion that people have to have a nationality or national identity to have the right to live somewhere. Nationality is a far newer concept than having a home. The sinti and roma and the kurds have similar problems, in fact the jews had it as well before they were gifted a strip of land and formed a nationality around it.

[Fragony]

See the argument I summarised above, that IIRC I've seen Frag or someone trot out here as well. "Palestinians" don't exist. The land was split into various states, one of which was Jordan, and so-called "Palestinians" are really Jordanians who have no right to any disputed land because they belong to a foreign state and not a disputed state. And since they don't exist, they don't exist to dispute the land, and thus Israel is merely holding what is her territory by right and without dispute. That's what I mean by 1984 and Communism. Nazism would preach hatred against its enemy. 1984-style Communism refuses to recognise their existence.

Is there anything historically wrong with that position? No they don't exist they were invented.

[Hooahguy]

That's what I mean by 1984 and Communism. Nazism would preach hatred against its enemy. 1984-style Communism refuses to recognise their existence.

Well, as more and more nationalistic Zionists move to Israel (especially from the US where worship of Israel is started from pre-school) the attitudes about Palestinians get even more violent. Just look at all the Price Tag attacks on Palestinian properties. Everything from burning olive groves to tagging buildings with things like "death to Arabs."

Just look at this conversation a (sane) friend of mine had with a radical new immigrant during Pillar of Defense:

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

And that was just a small portion of that conversation.

[Ironside]

Well the fact is simply that MSN and leftist self-congratulaters don't give a crap when it's not Israel. Absolute silence. When it's Israel though there isn't enough chocolate in the world to counter their hormonal spikes.

'Any states that are western or westernish are hold to a higher standard.'

That could at least be an explanation, but I am not buying it. Antisemitism is very much alive in Europe but it found a safer output to channel it.

Here's a few questions for you.

Does Israel act as it intends to to assimilate parts of the West Bank?
Did Israel commit small scale ethnic cleansing (mostly in the form of forced relocation) in the parts of the occupied territories that seems to be intended for assimilation? Or to rephrase it, does it live any Palestinians in the Jewish settlements?
Are the Palestinians living under occupied conditions?
Are the Palestinians the underdogs in the conflict?
Can you name an identical situation? Tibet is close, but that's forced cultural assimilation and creating a divisive society by importing Han Chinese in the upper echelons. It's also communistic China doing it and starting it during the cold war. So it's a dictorship and it started in a time it was hard to get traction.

Are the US held to a different standard than China?
Are the US getting more flak than China?
In a conflict that forces alliances, would Europe ally with the US or China?
Why did the left stop liking the US?
Why did the left stop being ok with Israel? (Hint. It started to rapidly decline in 1967).

And I'm trying to figure out how exactly the Left should've picked it up according to you.
By liking the muslims and absorbing jewish hate from there? The multicultural blinders is younger than that. Those blinders also fits "always support the underdogs" and "all cultures are equal and should all be cheerished" much better.
Hidden neo-nazis? They're good at hiding, since extreme left vs extreme right is the most common political violence. They hate eachother.
Ideological reasons? No. There's plenty of leftie ideological reasons to dislike the Israeli policy towards the Palestinians though.
Started with it? No, otherwise the left would've never liked Israel in any form.
Has there been occations and persons that gone far enough to be antisemitic rather than opposing Israeli treatment of the Palestinians? Sure, but it's not antisemitism that was the driving force.

[Fragony]

That's a barrage of questions. Got one back, who is surrounded by genocidal maniacs who have sworn to destroy their state and get shot at at daily bases.

Gonna cherrypick this one out though,

'Can you name an identical situation'

Absolutily, the western sahara of Marocco, supposedly the most modern state in Northern Africa. Also the Kurds come to mind.

I can answer all questions I think, but keep it to a smaller dosis for me please.

Edit, taking this on as well.

'And I'm trying to figure out how exactly the Left should've picked it up according to you.'

Simply because Israel proves that leftist 'intellectuals' are wrong. The society they think they can build is an illusion and the succes Israel has is a slap in the face bringing that home. Leftist intellectuals are used to never have been argued against, so it's simply resentment against the fact that is being completily wrong about some things.

[Ironside]

That's a barrage of questions. Got one back, who is surrounded by genocidal maniacs who have sworn to destroy their state and get shot at at daily bases.

The Palestinians? Or was it a multiple answer question?

They are shot at more than the Israeli, but the surronding genocidal maniacs got less political power.

Anyway, that goes into justification. And I'm saying that a large chunk of the left aren't buying that justification.

Can you name an identical situation'

Absolutily, the western sahara of Marocco, supposedly the most modern state in Northern Africa. Also the Kurds come to mind.

Both are dealing with suppression of a possible new state, rather than annexation (I remembered the right word now). It's less obvious.

I can answer all questions I think, but keep it to a smaller dosis for me please.

Most are Yes or No questions. It's more to provide a context. The two last ones are more complex, but a major part of the answer is that both nations started to look bullyish and imperialistic due to how they acting in war.

Simply because Israel proves that leftist 'intellectuals' are wrong. The society they think they can build is an illusion and the succes Israel has is a slap in the face bringing that home. Leftist intellectuals are used to never have been argued against, so it's simply resentment against the fact that is being completily wrong about some things.

Eh, the society the left wants to build is supposed to be more equal somehow. That's as far as they agree.

And I'm not sure what you mean by the success by Israel. Being successful, while brutal towards your neightbours aren't exactly uncommon in history.

Leftist intellectuals are quite used being argued against. What you might be able to argue is that they're unused to not be on the side of "the good guys", but it's not uncommon that they ignore the bad sides on the part they're cheering on. Or accept it as a part of the struggle. It's a gray vs gray conflict in any way.

Anyway, how it this supposed to make them anti-semitic instead of anti-Israel?

[Fragony]

Leftist intellectuals are quite used being argued against. What you might be able to argue is that they're unused to not be on the side of "the good guys", but it's not uncommon that they ignore the bad sides on the part they're cheering on. Or accept it as a part of the struggle. It's a gray vs gray conflict in any way.

Anyway, how it this supposed to make them anti-semitic instead of anti-Israel?

Because they only care about Israel. In other parts of the world violence and cruelty is taken for granted, uch much worse cruelty and violence I might add. It's no excuse that Israel is held at a higher standard, it's an inconsistancy in the school of thought of equality. Call it a gray area if you want, it won't get you any drinks in the leftist stratosphere and you probably know that if you ever been to a meeting of furious lefties, you won't convince me that a side has already been picked if you not aren't to come with anything better than this. The left is still deeply antisematic, not because of screaming sieg heil like in the old days, but by totally ignoring everything they don't fancy all that much. In short, the left is creepy and dangerous, what they see in others they don't recognise when looking into a mirror.

[Philippus Flavius Homovallumus]

Because they only care about Israel. In other parts of the world violence and cruelty is taken for granted, uch much worse cruelty and violence I might add. It's no excuse that Israel is held at a higher standard, it's an inconsistancy in the school of thought of equality. Call it a gray area if you want, it won't get you any drinks in the leftist stratosphere and you probably know that if you ever been to a meeting of furious lefties, you won't convince me that a side has already been picked if you not aren't to come with anything better than this. The left is still deeply antisematic, not because of screaming sieg heil like in the old days, but by totally ignoring everything they don't fancy all that much. In short, the left is creepy and dangerous, what they see in others they don't recognise when looking into a mirror.

I think you're half right - Israel is singled out due to hypocrisy - but not because they're Jewish.

The fact is - the Left can cope with African Despots slaughtering people, but it can't cope with what is apparently a "Western Democracy" doing the same. So Israel falls foul of the same exceptionalism as South Africa before it.

Underlying that is probably the realisation that if Israelis can pump sewage into the Palestinian water supply - then, then Americans could do that to Canadians, or at least Mexicans.

It makes it much harder to look back at the "Colonial era" as the Bad Old Days when we didn't "know better". The Israelis definitely know better, but they do it anyway. The logical extension being that the Victorians probably knew better too...

[Tellos Athenaios]

I think you're half right - Israel is singled out due to hypocrisy - but not because they're Jewish.

The fact is - the Left can cope with African Despots slaughtering people, but it can't cope with what is apparently a "Western Democracy" doing the same. So Israel falls foul of the same exceptionalism as South Africa before it.

Underlying that is probably the realisation that if Israelis can pump sewage into the Palestinian water supply - then, then Americans could do that to Canadians, or at least Mexicans.

Or: that you don't want your allies to be pulling that kind of stunt 'just cause. Which is the problem with Israel, the incredible 'just cause attitude towards pretty much everyone else. That kinda moves them from a likeable ally with an unfortunate tendency to elect deliberate idiots trying to pass off their ignorance as a virtue into straight up immoral and oddly reminiscent of certain past regimes.

[Fragony]

I think you're half right - Israel is singled out due to hypocrisy - but not because they're Jewish.

The left sympathises with people who hate Israel because they are jewish. What was the first thing that was done when Israel moved out of Gaza? The synagogues were burned down. Israel's enemies are openly antisemit and aren't very secretive about what they have in mind, and leftist cheer-monkeys wear their symbols. Wearing an arafat-shawl is no different than wearing a swastika, it stands for the same thing. The left not deeply antisemit, I don't think so.

If you question Israel's behaviour (shooting back) 'The villainy you teach me I will execute, and I shall go hard, but I will better the instruction'

I am sure that quote is on a wall somewhere.

[Ironside]

If you question Israel's behaviour (shooting back) 'The villainy you teach me I will execute, and I shall go hard, but I will better the instruction'

I am sure that quote is on a wall somewhere.

They already knew that lesson in 1947.

By now they're complaining about a nasty bruise that the house owner gave them, while the home owner is very beatened up. And they won't leave, because one room is absolutly faboulous.

40 years ago it might have been militarly important, but nowadays there's no major military threat towards Israel. Instead we should celebrate the bully because he shows restraint.
It's now Israel can afford to create a modicum of good will and improve the situation. Even if Hamas would use the opportunity to increase their arms, they would still end up with way to little arms to threaten Israel and would start to become very obvious that they don't care for the average Palestinian. It's unknown if Israel got the same opportunity 40 years from now, or alternativly one of those "kill them all" Israeli politicians gets a bit too much power.

The Palestinian hatred is a mixture of anti-semitism and ourage of being occupied. The Iranian is a mix of anti-semitism, realpolitik (they're exerting influence through the conflict) and a kind of excuse "don't look at the problems at home, look at the evil Israelis/Jews and how we temporary care for our Palestinian brothers in plight".

[Fragony]

That muslims hate jews needs little extra explanation. That neo-nazi's hate jews also needs no explanation. Antisemitism on the left does though, and don't tell me it doesn't exist. It's heartwarming really, a notoriously antisemit French comdedian brings all groups together, in the adience there are muslims, skinheads, and Arafat-shawl wearing 'anti-facists'(lol), cozy and in perfect harmony, nice to share a hobby, really binding.

[Rhyfelwyr]

That muslims hate jews needs little extra explanation. That neo-nazi's hate jews also needs no explanation. Antisemitism on the left does though, and don't tell me it doesn't exist. It's heartwarming really, a notoriously antisemit French comdedian brings all groups together, in the adience there are muslims, skinheads, and Arafat-shawl wearing 'anti-facists'(lol), cozy and in perfect harmony, nice to share a hobby, really binding.

You get clowns on the left just like you do on the right. I don't think anti-semetism is a feature of the mainstream left.

[Fragony]

You get clowns on the left just like you do on the right. I don't think anti-semetism is a feature of the mainstream left.

Certainly seems to be just that. You can blame my fellow rightwingers for being overly pro-Israel and being unfair towards the Palestinians. I'd take that.

[Ironside]

That muslims hate jews needs little extra explanation. That neo-nazi's hate jews also needs no explanation. Antisemitism on the left does though, and don't tell me it doesn't exist. It's heartwarming really, a notoriously antisemit French comdedian brings all groups together, in the adience there are muslims, skinheads, and Arafat-shawl wearing 'anti-facists'(lol), cozy and in perfect harmony, nice to share a hobby, really binding.

That it exists in fringes that doesn't get the criticism it should because they're for "the cause", wouldn't suprise me one bit. But to go back to the original topic:

It doesn't exist even close to the amount where someone can state that the BDS movement would either exist or be anywhere close as strong if the Palestina conflict was resolved and be taken seriously.

I would even go a step further, even if anti-semitism would be a major reason for why the conflict is in so high focus, it doesn't change the nature of the majority of the protesting. To take West-Sahara for example. It's mostly ignored, but the left is criticising Marocco for it. They're very far from giving Marocco a stamp of approval.

So a situation where Israel would be filled with Christians would still have Israel heavily criticised.

Basically, it's the defense of a celeberty who ends up in bar fights (since who started it can be a bit dubious for that one sometimes) alot and ends up in the spot light. He immidiatly attack the media for spot lighting him because he's famous and they don't focus on the random barfighting smuck on the street. And (intentionally?) misses the point that the barfighting of the random smuck isn't in any way approved.

[Fragony]

I can't really get on-topic, I am not familiar with that organisation, I don't know what their game is. I do however agree with the quote that is in the original topic. You don't have to, we are debating because we see things differently, that's fine. I am not blind to the injustices but I find the fixation suspect to say the least. I am pretty confident that the conflict will end when the choice is made to end it. But Hamas can't do that without becomming a target itselve. This is a proxy warfare, they will just be replaced by Islamic Jihad or even more radical groups. Either way, normal Palestinians who's only concern is what's for dinner are screwed, no matter what is done.

[Seamus Fermanagh]

You get clowns on the left just like you do on the right. I don't think anti-semetism is a feature of the mainstream left.

No, no, no. That's "Clowns to the left" and "JOKERS to the right." Do the youth of today remember nothing about what matters?

[Seamus Fermanagh]

40 years ago it might have been militarly important, but nowadays there's no major military threat towards Israel.

No credible threat on a formal military level. As in, no force combination exists that could truly wipe Israel from the map.

However, the security threat is still real and Israel faces all of the usual difficulties in confronting an opponent who has resorted to a strictly asymmetric warfare mode. From mid 2003 to the end of 2009, the USA had hundreds of fatalities each year in the Iraqi occupation, long after we had won the conventional conflict. Israel is engaged in suppressing an insurgency movement -- a far more vexing task.

[Husar]

The left hates jews because jews horde all the money in their banks, it's an inherent feature of left political philosophy to hate the rich. It's not the fault of the left that all the jews are rich and most of the rich are jews. If they jews want to avoid this, they can gift their banks to their governments.*

Spoiler Alert, click show to read: 

*Not all of this is totally serial, serially!
Everytime I say "the" it's serious though.

[Hooahguy]

If you question Israel's behaviour (shooting back) 'The villainy you teach me I will execute, and I shall go hard, but I will better the instruction'

The problem isnt Israel fighting back. I dont think anyone sane questions Israel's right to fight back. The problem is that shelling and launching airstrikes in one of the most population dense areas in the world is a daft idea. If you think that Cast Lead and Pillar of Defense were sound COIN strategies then I consider you daft. If anything, those two major offensives in Gaza caused more tension between the Palestinians and Israels than eased it. At this point the Palestinians are all too familiar with the iron fist, and extending a peace branch would do far more in terms of COIN than an air strike ever would.

[Fragony]

The problem isnt Israel fighting back. I dont think anyone sane questions Israel's right to fight back. The problem is that shelling and launching airstrikes in one of the most population dense areas in the world is a daft idea. If you think that Cast Lead and Pillar of Defense were sound COIN strategies then I consider you daft. If anything, those two major offensives in Gaza caused more tension between the Palestinians and Israels than eased it. At this point the Palestinians are all too familiar with the iron fist, and extending a peace branch would do far more in terms of COIN than an air strike ever would.

Feel free to call me daft. Did leaving the west-bank ever alleviate any tensions? The reason that shells and air-strikes hit the most densily populated area's is because these are purposily used as a human shield. That is a bad deal for the people who live there of course and I do feel sorry for them, but I am not looking at Israel when I consider the misery that is bestowed on them, getting killed is their purpose in a very cynical propaganda warfare. You have changed since your visit, but you attended one of these religious schools that are pretty damn extremist and I can hardly blame you for, imho, losing sight of the bigger picture, as they are frankly scum. But it isn't just them that are hated, all jews are hated. You did the right thing to gtfo of that place because they are just as bad by the way, congratulations for being sane.

[Hooahguy]

Israel is still in the West Bank, you are thinking of Gaza. If the US's experience in Iraq and Afghanistan is any indication, iron fists do not work in the long term. Humanitarian aid does. Hearts and minds. At the very least, settlement expansion isnt helping either.

[Fragony]

Ok not fully but the border area's of the West-bank, gaza yeah. It's not a concession that had very much effect on the mindset. And really what's the problem. Israel got attacked and gained some territory in the proces.

For the greater perspective, look at Europe http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=14d_1348362692

Nothing new.

[Beskar]

For the greater perspective, look at Europe http://www.liveleak.com/view?i=14d_1348362692

The video is quite poor in some cases, it has the Great War being conducted ten years too early and with post-WW1 borders in 1914 was the most glaring example. There are quite a number of other different events which are occurring on the wrong dates and such, and a couple of them seemed made up.

Eitherway, that is the past, it is forgetting key features of the Israeli-Palestine conflict such as the Oslo Accords.

[Fragony]

The video is quite poor in some cases, it has the Great War being conducted ten years too early and with post-WW1 borders in 1914 was the most glaring example. There are quite a number of other different events which are occurring on the wrong dates and such, and a couple of them seemed made up.

Eitherway, that is the past, it is forgetting key features of the Israeli-Palestine conflict such as the Oslo Accords.

Yeah there are some errors. In the second worldwar as well. The soundtrack makes up for that though.