1. This site uses cookies. By continuing to use this site, you are agreeing to our use of cookies. Learn More.

Characterizing Israel

Discussion in 'theory, philosophy & history' started by frogwoman, Aug 2, 2014.

  1. SpackleFrog

    SpackleFrog Smash showy bell-bottom pants and sporty haircuts

  2. SpackleFrog

    SpackleFrog Smash showy bell-bottom pants and sporty haircuts

  3. DotCommunist

    DotCommunist my world is fire and blood

    MellySingsDoom and SpackleFrog like this.
  4. SpackleFrog

    SpackleFrog Smash showy bell-bottom pants and sporty haircuts

  5. weltweit

    weltweit Well-Known Member

    I have also seen reports that anti-Semitism is on the rise in Europe, but I am not totally convinced. I have heard some monitoring is pretty shallow and it is also not surprising that there is some backlash against people and institutions associated rightly or wrongly with Israel because of its recent actions in Gaza.

    If some have erroneously vented their anger against individual Jews rather than the regime in Israel, or have muddled the actions of the regime with those of innocent European Jews I can understand it, it is a mistake I have made myself in the past.

    I think it is most problematic if demonstrations in favour of Gaza or against the regime in Israel are attended by visible anti-semites, attentive media will pick up on that, though I am not sure what the mainstream demonstrators can do about it.
     
  6. phildwyer

    phildwyer Gorau arf arf dysg

    There are also pockets of such peoples in Britain.
     
  7. (((((taffs)))))
     
  8. ska invita

    ska invita back on the other side

    For a bit of light relief and escapsim i got hold of a copy of the first Hobbit movie last night...however turns out that "Dwarvish was designed by J.R.R. Tolkien to sounds like a Semitic language, and the history of the dwarves themselves resembles that of the ancient Hebrews."
     
  9. butchersapron

    butchersapron blood on the walls

    Lord of the Rings was a key text for much of the third-postionist style italian post-war far right. Serious. Don't ask me why though, never read it.
     
  10. ska invita

    ska invita back on the other side

    ive no idea why but i guess theres a lot of war along "pure racial lines" going on in with lots of value judgements about which race deserves to live and which race deserves to die.

    ((((orcs)))


    sorry for the derail ;)
     
  11. SpackleFrog

    SpackleFrog Smash showy bell-bottom pants and sporty haircuts

    I've heard there's a wealth of material on what a mad genetic supremacist type Tolkien was but I have no desire to read any of it or those bloody books ever again. My very lazily put together hypothesis would be that for Tolkien:

    Elves - Beautiful, Wise, Strong - Aryans
    Dwarves - Love gold, greedy craftspeople, short and not so beautiful but basically ok - Jews
    Orcs - evil - black people
     
  12. ska invita

    ska invita back on the other side

    SpackleFrog likes this.
  13. Any links? I would be interested to read about that
     
  14. butchersapron

    butchersapron blood on the walls

    Yep - and the fantasy thing goes far beyond LOR. This is a non-fascist article hosted on a now dead third-postionist shit site years ago, link is to the internet archive version of it:

    The Blend of Literary and Historical Fantasy in the Italian New Right- Roger Griffin

     
    frogwoman and Spanky Longhorn like this.
  15. ferrelhadley

    ferrelhadley These violent delights have violent ends.

    There is bad racism\sectarianism\bigotry. The type espoused by people Marxists dont like. Then there is good racism\sectarianism\bigotry. The type espoused by people Marxists do like.
     
  16. butchersapron

    butchersapron blood on the walls

    Oh shut up.
     
    Spanky Longhorn likes this.
  17. ViolentPanda

    ViolentPanda Hardly getting over it.

    You should have paid more attention to the old saw about "it's better to stay silent and be thought a fool, than to speak and leave no doubt".
     
    redsquirrel and Spanky Longhorn like this.
  18. Casually Red

    Casually Red tomorrow belongs to me

    a ghetto, or even a concentration camp
     
  19. Casually Red

    Casually Red tomorrow belongs to me

    no wish to derail but despite some localised sectarian tensions in the north there is absolutely no political or religious group anywhere in Ireland who have this aim or have ever expressed it as an aim . Not even in the 16th century. Even the drowning in the Bann stuff back then is regarded as a myth by todays historians.
     
  20. Wow I agree with Casually Red
     
    frogwoman likes this.
  21. Casually Red

    Casually Red tomorrow belongs to me

    I think Zionist mainstream society has now become politically and ethically radicalised to the point it has surpassed apartheid south Africa and is on the verge of assuming a more openly nazi, volkicsh character. While the white south african regime were bigots they werent into genocide, they never talked about wiping out the black population as a means to preserve apartheid . In Israel today when articles like this one, when Genocide is permissable, can be found in the mainstream media written by mainstream commentators one must consider things there have passed beyond the apartheid mentality stage and gone somewhere much much darker.

    http://www.ibtimes.com/when-genocid...s-israel-yochanan-gordons-post-sparks-1646490

    Personally I see the zionist phenomenon as first and foremost a white European colonial one regardless of the fact some of the colonists came from Arab and even some African societies. The jewish angle to it for me is much more an ethnic thing than a religious one. The bulk of these colonisers come from either Europe or the United States and often their links to or observance of Judaism can be tenuous in the extreme, while others can definitely be zealots . Whether some want to seize land and expel or otherwise destroy populations because they believe God told them to, or just use that as an excuse for expansionism, or couldnt care less and just want to expand anyway is largely irrelevant to me. Why they want to do it will always first and foremost be for their own self enrichment and empowerment at the expense of others. Their statekd justifications for it will simply be an excuse to legitimise racial crime .

    Personally I believe the Nazi regime targetted jews first and foremost because they were a crew of gangsters who saw the jews as easy people to rob and exploit . I believe many of them didnt really give a real hoot about racial theories , although they were ignorant bigots at heart , and were first and foremost interested in loot. Same with the slavs, a bunch of nazi gangsters first and foremost wanted land, resources and slaves and all the racial theory did was gave them the green light to take it legally and morally .

    Zionist expansionism largely does the same . Religious theory is simply used to give a veneer of morality and legality to nazi style gangsterism. Whether some of its proponents proclaim that as an article of religious faith or not matters little when the expansionist and racist aims of secular zionist and religious zealot are essentially the same. The destruction of the Palestinian people in persuit of Lebensraum for the master race. Without doubt zionists , even the liberal ones, see themselves as a master race with a perfectly legitimate right to seize their neighbours lands and wipe them from the face of it. The difference between secular zionist and religious zionist is the difference between a Strasserite and a Hitlerite. Not that much when alls said and done.
     
    Last edited: Aug 13, 2014
  22. butchersapron

    butchersapron blood on the walls

    Here's an interesting article in Haaretz today - it's an interview with Zeev Sternhell . He's one of the most respected writers on the birth of fascism - his thesis is that it was a synthesis of right and left wanting to take the fruits of modernisation but hold back the social upheaval it brings with it - it's not a position that i agree with, but it's an influential one and he's someone that should be taken seriously - . The interesting/relevant part in this is the suggestion that Modern day Israel most closely resembles vichy france - a regime that came to power to remove democracy with majority support under pressure of war conditions - the comparison is obvious here when you look at the direction of left-travel in Israel over the last 50 years:

    Signs of fascism in Israel reached new peak during Gaza op, says renowned scholar

    edit: oh bugger, full article now gone - let me try and find another version of it.
     
    frogwoman and Spanky Longhorn like this.
  23. ViolentPanda

    ViolentPanda Hardly getting over it.

    I'm not sure you can claim a "volkisch" character to Zionism per se, even though many nationalist Zionists presume to borrow from Jewish history at will, they can't really assemble a "national myth" or set of myths more than a century old.
     
  24. ska invita

    ska invita back on the other side

    AMY GOODMAN: And yet, Noam, you say that the analogy between Israel’s occupation of the terrories and apartheid South Africa is a dubious one. Why?

    NOAM CHOMSKY: Many reasons. Take, say, the term "apartheid." In the Occupied Territories, what Israel is doing is much worse than apartheid. To call it apartheid is a gift to Israel, at least if by "apartheid" you mean South African-style apartheid. What’s happening in the Occupied Territories is much worse. There’s a crucial difference. The South African Nationalists needed the black population. That was their workforce. It was 85 percent of the workforce of the population, and that was basically their workforce. They needed them. They had to sustain them. The bantustans were horrifying, but South Africa did try to sustain them. They didn’t put them on a diet. They tried to keep them strong enough to do the work that they needed for the country. They tried to get international support for the bantustans.

    The Israeli relationship to the Palestinians in the Occupied Territories is totally different. They just don’t want them. They want them out, or at least in prison. And they’re acting that way. That’s a very striking difference, which means that the apartheid analogy, South African apartheid, to the Occupied Territories is just a gift to Israeli violence. It’s much worse than that. If you look inside Israel, there’s plenty of repression and discrimination. I’ve written about it extensively for decades. But it’s not apartheid. It’s bad, but it’s not apartheid. So the term, I just don’t think is applicable.
     
    The Pale King and frogwoman like this.
  25. ska invita

    ska invita back on the other side

    I think story telling is a big part of zionism and Jewish culture in general, with lots of history to retell from the modern era, but especially the biblical persecution of the Israelites is a big influence to those raised within the religion and definitely an important component of the Israeli national myth - don't you think? Maybe it isnt drawn on by the state as explicitly as the nazis did, but thats only because it is a given understanding - it doesn't need to be embellished and promoted by the state to the same degree as its already there, and the continuation of the myth making is carried out by the rabbis.
     
  26. two sheds

    two sheds not as daft as i look

    The term 'worse than apartheid' could apply then.
     
  27. ViolentPanda

    ViolentPanda Hardly getting over it.

    Well, you're stepping into a very loaded area, with regard to Zionist story-telling, given how massively they've sliced and diced Jewish culture to arrive at their particular mythos. We're talking about people who pretty much scorned most Yiddish-language folk myth because it didn't fit in with their plans to "capture" Jewishness by endorsing Hebrew; people who ignored masses of European Jewish history because it was socialist and/or anarchist and internationalist rather than nationalist. Jewishness is so much broader than what Zionism proffers as "Jewish".
     
    frogwoman likes this.
  28. ska invita

    ska invita back on the other side

    sounds fascinating.....but do you not think, loaded and partisan though it may be, it is a characteristic of the state?
     
  29. ViolentPanda

    ViolentPanda Hardly getting over it.

    Sure, it's a characteristic of most states in fact, but I'm not convinced that in Zionism's caseit's constructed along Volkisch lines. To do that would require at least making an attempt at inclusivity with regard to your "national" group, rather than eliding those bits of history and myth that you find embarrassing, as Zionism has done.
    People tend to forget that the Nazis didn't cut and paste their folk myth, they merely bent what already existed to their own ends, whereas the nationalist Zionists have, in effect, attempted to re-write history.
     
    Spanky Longhorn and frogwoman like this.
  30. butchersapron

    butchersapron blood on the walls

    This is from a paper (pdf) by Roger Griffin looking at developments in the far-right in the 'post-fascist era'. He doesn't use it in relation to Israel but the parallels are clear:

    It would be academically irresponsible, however, to give this brief account what is, in a liberal perspective, a happy ending. As many reading this will have been already waiting impatiently for me to point out, another type of radical right has crept up on European society, one which is potentially of considerable virulence, not in its ability to destroy liberalism from without, but to contaminate it from within. Sometimes called ‘radical right populism’, or simply ‘the radical right’, its paradoxical qualities perhaps emerge more clearly in the term ‘ethnocratic liberalism’.

    It is a type of party politics which is not technically a form of fascism, or even a disguised form, for it lacks the core palingenetic vision of a ‘new order’ totally replacing the liberal system. Rather it enthusiastically embraces the liberal system, but considers only one ethnic group full members of civil society. As the case of apartheid South Africa illustrates only too clearly, a state based on ethnocratic liberalism is forced by its own logic to create institutions, including a terror apparatus, to impose a a deeply illiberal regime on all those who do not qualify on racial grounds for being treated as human beings. This contaminated, restrictive form of liberalism poses considerable taxonomic problems because, while it aims to retain liberal institutions and procedures and remain economically and diplomatically part of the international liberal democratic community, its axiomatic denial of the universality of human rights predisposes it to behave against ethnic outgroups as violently as a fascist regime.

    This is who Griffin is applying it to btw:

    The Front National, the FPÖ, the Lega Nord, the Vlaamsblok, the Republikaner, the Centrumpartei, the Scandinavian Progress parties, and scores of openly xenophobic parties which have emerged in the countries of the former Soviet Empire vary considerably in their programmes and aspirations, and can sincerely claim to have nothing to do with historic fascism in the conventional sense of the word. Yet in a world inoculated against openly revolutionary varieties of palingenetic ultranationalism, their axiomatic rejection of multi-culturalism, their longing for ‘purity’, their nostalgia for a mythical world of racial homogeneity and clearly demarcated boundaries of cultural differentiation, their celebration of the ties of blood and history over reason and a common humanity, their rejection of ius soli for ius sanguinis, their solvent-like abuse of history represent a reformist version of the same basic myth, one which poses a more serious threat to liberal democracy than fascism because it is able to disguise itself, rather like a stick insect posing as a twig to catch its prey.

     
    Last edited: Aug 23, 2014
    bimble and frogwoman like this.

Share This Page