Mothering Forums - Reply to Topic

Thread: Noam Chomsky on Gaza... Reply to Thread
Title:
Message:
Drag and Drop File Upload
Drag files here to attach!
Upload Progress: 0
Trackback:
Send Trackbacks to (Separate multiple URLs with spaces) :
Post Icons
You may choose an icon for your message from the following list:
 

Register Now

In order to be able to post messages on the Mothering Forums forums, you must first register.
Please enter your desired user name, your email address and other required details in the form below.
User Name:
If you do not want to register, fill this field only and the name will be used as user name for your post.
Password
Please enter a password for your user account. Note that passwords are case-sensitive.
Password:
Confirm Password:
Email Address
Please enter a valid email address for yourself.
Email Address:

Log-in

Human Verification

In order to verify that you are a human and not a spam bot, please enter the answer into the following box below based on the instructions contained in the graphic.



  Additional Options
Miscellaneous Options

  Topic Review (Newest First)
09-02-2013 11:22 AM
Fillyjonk

Its a strange thing to accuse someone of, being "self hating.". The implication is that if you are Jewish, or part of any cultural minority, you cannot criticise that minority's actions without also hating yourself. But there is a further implication, which I find stranger still, that because you hate yourself, and/or any compliance in it, your opinion is invalid. 

 

I also find something else interesting. Except in the direct context of Israeli citizenship, Chomsky never mentions Jews but rather Israelis. At no point does he conflate the Jewish religion with the Israeli state. That's something I'm careful not to do also. I think the Israeli state is an appalling, murderous entity. I am not going to assume that the kids locally who observe the Sabbath or who won't eat pork are complicit in that. I am not going to assume that every Jew supports the atrocities of Israel, the gunning down of children who are waving white flags. I am not going to make that assumption even though I know there to be a significant correlation. I will give each and every person the benefit of the doubtAnd so, from everything I have read, does Chomsky. He never conflates Judasim with pro-Israeli sentiment. I think it really is very unfortunate to confuse the two. People have a right to follow whatever religion they choose, without having to sign up to defend a state that the UN considers to be operating an apartheid regime.

 

I think he is a first rate critical thinker. Calling someone names like "self hating"- well what does that achieve? Its just an ad hominum attack and the issues are far too serious for that.

01-21-2009 10:41 PM
ChasingPeace
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazy_eights View Post
Ah, so you believe that Jews should be forbidden from living in parts of the land of Israel? Those such as Hevron that have historic significance, religious import, religious sites and historic continuous Jewish settlements of over centuries?? Those places that were made "Judenrein" (cleansed of Jews) when they were in Arab hands? While Arabs are allowed to live in Israel proper, Palestine should be ethnically cleansed?

Again - "settlements" is a diversionary tactic. One that absolves the Palestinians of their role in the failure of peace negotiations and their failure to use the BILLIONS in aid they are received to build anything productive.
Wow. I don't know how to respond to this. My post that you quoted refers to ILLEGAL settlements. Yes, I oppose ILLEGAL settlements under Israeli control.

As far as "settlements" being a "diversionary tactic"--wow. This seems to suggest a view that Israel holds no blame for the absence of peace. Wow.
01-21-2009 10:16 PM
Unagidon
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazy_eights View Post
Really? No, I don't think.

Could you please back that up with some links to statements from the Israeli gov't? Ones where they reject the idea of peace? Ones where they reject negotiations? Ones where they reject a two state solution? B/c they have signed on to all those ideas.
Well, there's what the government says and there's what it does. It says it wants peace, but it was Israel that broke the cease fire last November. It says it wants a two state solution (sometimes) but it still continues to build settlements on the West Bank. SO there's the rub.
01-21-2009 10:08 PM
sadie_sabot if they're going to live in what is supposed to be palestine, then they should be living there under the law of palestine. they should be subject to the palestinian government, should one ever be allowed to really govern. They should not be able to just swoop in and take land other people are living on, steal houses other people are living in, terrorize people under the benevolent gaze of the IOF while the palestinian cops are powerless. they should not be able to drive to and from israel on roads forbidden to Palestinians, for example.

As it is, they are an outpost of the colonial state of Israel, and are used to drive a wedge and that while they're there, there really can be no Palestinian state.

I believe that all of hisotric palestine, which encompasses the west bank, Gaza, and Israel, should be open to Israelis and to Palestinians, all subject to the same secular, democratically elected government. As it is, the only existing and enforceable laws protect israelis and subjugate Palestinians.
01-21-2009 10:03 PM
umsami
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazy_eights View Post
I'll quote Barak Obama from his terrific speech yesterday. I think it applies to the Palestinian sitiation so well: "To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect. To those leaders around the globe who seek to sow conflict, or blame their society's ills on the West -- know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy."
See, I took this as a jibe at Israel... for totally decemating Gaza. :


I think it's a good piece... well-written. I hope it gets picked up in MSM, but I won't hold my breath.

Did anybody scroll down and see the picture "Obama through Gazans Eyes"? What do you think? Do you agree... or is it more of a time will tell thing?
01-21-2009 09:57 PM
crazy_eights
Quote:
Originally Posted by ChasingPeace View Post
They may have signed on to those ideas, but then they continue to build illegal settlements in such a way that makes a viable Palestinian state untenable. Empty rhetoric.
Ah, so you believe that Jews should be forbidden from living in parts of the land of Israel? Those such as Hevron that have historic significance, religious import, religious sites and historic continuous Jewish settlements of over centuries?? Those places that were made "Judenrein" (cleansed of Jews) when they were in Arab hands? While Arabs are allowed to live in Israel proper, Palestine should be ethnically cleansed?

Again - "settlements" is a diversionary tactic. One that absolves the Palestinians of their role in the failure of peace negotiations and their failure to use the BILLIONS in aid they are received to build anything productive.

I'll quote Barak Obama from his terrific speech yesterday. I think it applies to the Palestinian sitiation so well: "To the Muslim world, we seek a new way forward, based on mutual interest and mutual respect. To those leaders around the globe who seek to sow conflict, or blame their society's ills on the West -- know that your people will judge you on what you can build, not what you destroy."
01-21-2009 09:56 PM
sadie_sabot
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazy_eights View Post
Of course, you have the right not to comment. But it is telling that everyone has chosen to jump on my "self-hating" comment rather than my valid criticisms. I believe that is called "change the topic when you don't have a response and hope they just go away".
I will always point out silencing techniques when I see them.

Quote:
Originally Posted by ChasingPeace View Post
They may have signed on to those ideas, but then they continue to build illegal settlements in such a way that makes a viable Palestinian state untenable. Empty rhetoric.
exactly. Actions speak louder than...well, than empty rhetoric.
01-21-2009 09:55 PM
ChasingPeace
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazy_eights View Post
You can start with the comment about Shimon Peres. Shimon Peres is the architect of the Oslo accords, has good relations with Palestinians for years, met with Palestinian leaders when it was illegal for gov't leaders to do so, has been one of the primary proponents of a Palestinian state.....and here is Chomsky's summary of dear Shimon: . And that doesn't even begin to touch on the portrayal of Lebanon in the 80's.
So you're disagreeing with Chomsky's conclusion that Peres is "one of the great terrorist commanders of the era of Reagan's "War on Terror," not with his sources, correct?
01-21-2009 09:47 PM
ChasingPeace
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazy_eights View Post
Really? No, I don't think.

Could you please back that up with some links to statements from the Israeli gov't? Ones where they reject the idea of peace? Ones where they reject negotiations? Ones where they reject a two state solution? B/c they have signed on to all those ideas.
They may have signed on to those ideas, but then they continue to build illegal settlements in such a way that makes a viable Palestinian state untenable. Empty rhetoric.
01-21-2009 09:43 PM
crazy_eights
Quote:
Originally Posted by sadie_sabot View Post
was this for me? I'm able to choose for myself what I want to comment on.
Of course, you have the right not to comment. But it is telling that everyone has chosen to jump on my "self-hating" comment rather than my valid criticisms. I believe that is called "change the topic when you don't have a response and hope they just go away".
01-21-2009 09:36 PM
sadie_sabot
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazy_eights View Post
Um, instead of attacking me for my "self-hating" and "biased" comments, please read my critique instead. Do you deny my points? I can keep going (though I was asked for "only one"....as if there were none )
was this for me? I'm able to choose for myself what I want to comment on.
01-21-2009 09:32 PM
crazy_eights
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unagidon View Post
Substitute "Jewish" for "Islamic" and it looks quite a bit like the Israeli position, don't you think?
Really? No, I don't think.

Could you please back that up with some links to statements from the Israeli gov't? Ones where they reject the idea of peace? Ones where they reject negotiations? Ones where they reject a two state solution? B/c they have signed on to all those ideas.
01-21-2009 09:30 PM
crazy_eights Um, instead of attacking me for my "self-hating" and "biased" comments, please read my critique instead. Do you deny my points? I can keep going (though I was asked for "only one"....as if there were none )
01-21-2009 09:29 PM
Unagidon
Quote:
Initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement. Abusing any part of Palestine is abuse directed against part of religion. Nationalism of the Islamic Resistance Movement is part of its religion. Its members have been fed on that. For the sake of hoisting the banner of Allah over their homeland they fight. "Allah will be prominent, but most people do not know."
Substitute "Jewish" for "Islamic" and it looks quite a bit like the Israeli position, don't you think?
01-21-2009 08:52 PM
Swan3
Quote:
Originally Posted by sadie_sabot View Post
I get that there can be a dynamic within oppressed communities of people itnernalizing the oppression. but the idea that to criticize Israel means you ahte yourself as a jew is just, well...it strikes me as a silencing tactic.

won't work on Noam!
:

Won't work on him and many others that are part of a growing voice of opposition to Israel's actions against Palestinians...There's Naomi Klein, Norman Finklestein, Rabbis for Peace as well as many Israeli organizations within Israel. I've heard many of the above speak and they certainly were comfortable in their own skin and have a love for their heritage.
01-21-2009 08:47 PM
sadie_sabot
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazy_eights View Post
Or maybe we need read what he writes more critically instead of swallowing it whole.
oh, how offensive.

and the self hating comment?

I get that there can be a dynamic within oppressed communities of people itnernalizing the oppression. but the idea that to criticize Israel means you ahte yourself as a jew is just, well...it strikes me as a silencing tactic.

won't work on Noam!

and, off topic: Noam's wife passed recently. hold him in your hearts; may he live forever! but he won't, and his passing will be sad! I am grateful that he continues to contribute and speak the truths that many don't want to hear.
01-21-2009 08:42 PM
Swan3
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazy_eights View Post
Or maybe we need read what he writes more critically instead of swallowing it whole.
The same could be said of rejecting it as a whole.
01-21-2009 08:29 PM
crazy_eights Hamas Charter about 1/2 down the page after some info on the background of the organization.

Quote:
Initiatives, and so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement. Abusing any part of Palestine is abuse directed against part of religion. Nationalism of the Islamic Resistance Movement is part of its religion. Its members have been fed on that. For the sake of hoisting the banner of Allah over their homeland they fight. "Allah will be prominent, but most people do not know."
01-21-2009 08:19 PM
crazy_eights
Quote:
Originally Posted by ema-adama View Post
Quote:
Hamas is regularly described as "Iranian-backed Hamas, which is dedicated to the destruction of Israel." One will be hard put to find something like "democratically elected Hamas, which has long been calling for a two-state settlement in accord with the international consensus" -- blocked for over 30 years by the US and Israel, which flatly and explicitly reject the right of Palestinians to self-determination. All true, but not a useful contribution to the Party Line, hence dispensable.
?
I know I was told that one example would be enough, but since ema-adama cited this, let's go with it. I want to know what planet Noam Chomsky is living on. Hamas openly rejects Israel's right to exist, calls for it's destruction, rejects negotiations, rejects a two-state solution and sees not just all Israelis BUT ALL JEWS as valid targets. Yes, if you want, I can provide links - just look at Hamas's charter! Bias is actually quite polite. I'd say "dreamworld" except for all the slander contained therein. And people want to tell us that this is "spot on" and an accurate portrayal???? I'm baffled.
01-21-2009 07:40 PM
crazy_eights
Quote:
Originally Posted by studentmama View Post
No one has been more concise and on point about the dangers of the idea of pre-emptive war, and I am certain people here and other places would call him anti-American for his commentary. However, he was and is right and instead of sweeping his ideas away with a "he's self-hating," maybe we should be asking more questions about what he is talking about than simply dismissing him. You can disagree with his assessment without calling him a name.
Or maybe we need read what he writes more critically instead of swallowing it whole.
01-21-2009 04:23 PM
ema-adama
Quote:
Hamas is regularly described as "Iranian-backed Hamas, which is dedicated to the destruction of Israel." One will be hard put to find something like "democratically elected Hamas, which has long been calling for a two-state settlement in accord with the international consensus" -- blocked for over 30 years by the US and Israel, which flatly and explicitly reject the right of Palestinians to self-determination. All true, but not a useful contribution to the Party Line, hence dispensable.
?

Quote:
The British were not justified in using force to defend themselves against the (very real) terror of the American colonists seeking independence, or to terrorize Irish Catholics in response to IRA terror - and when they finally turned to the sensible policy of addressing legitimate grievances, the terror ended. It is not a matter of "proportionality," but of choice of action in the first place: Is there an alternative to violence?
Now, that is something I can relate to.

To be honest, I am not sure what he is trying to say. I get that he critises Israel and thinks that the Palestinians are helpless victims and that Hamas is just really a dog with a bark and no bite and that this whole mess is all Israels fault. And he argues convincingly.

But for me he glosses over important issues (Hamas repeatedly calling for a two state solution (!) and those pesky, albeit illegal rockets) and I do not see him presenting a clear way forward, beyond his critisism. Which I just find hard to swallow. I am all for looking at the darker side and critisizing any country (Israel included) - but do something with the critisism. Use it to mould a peaceful way forward.

Things are not working. I think many people see that and agree.

Self hating Jew? hmmmm, a Jewish someone who is very critical of Israel and perhaps has a different vision of what the Jewish homeland would look like. I do not know.

Just like the Palestinians are not a monolithic 'they', so is Israel not a monlitihic 'them' Believe it or not, good things do happen here and good people live their lives here.
01-21-2009 03:58 PM
studentmama Noam Chomsky does not say things to be popular. He calls it like he sees it and he also has such a breadth of knowledge, he doesn't come into it with one side or the other(like there are ever just two sides).

No one has been more concise and on point about the dangers of the idea of pre-emptive war, and I am certain people here and other places would call him anti-American for his commentary. However, he was and is right and instead of sweeping his ideas away with a "he's self-hating," maybe we should be asking more questions about what he is talking about than simply dismissing him. You can disagree with his assessment without calling him a name.

Far too many time we look at world conflicts in vacuums, as if they are not interconnected with one another. Well, the world is connected, and has been as long as we have been on this lovely planet, to pretend that conflicts happen in a vacuum is to pretend they are not happening on the same planet we all live on.
01-21-2009 03:39 PM
crazy_eights
Quote:
Originally Posted by Unagidon View Post
Please give me an example from the artcle. One will do.
You can start with the comment about Shimon Peres. Shimon Peres is the architect of the Oslo accords, has good relations with Palestinians for years, met with Palestinian leaders when it was illegal for gov't leaders to do so, has been one of the primary proponents of a Palestinian state.....and here is Chomsky's summary of dear Shimon:
Quote:
directed by Shimon Peres, one of the great terrorist commanders of the era of Reagan's "War on Terror."
. And that doesn't even begin to touch on the portrayal of Lebanon in the 80's.
01-21-2009 03:32 PM
Arduinna
Quote:
Originally Posted by kolleen9 View Post
Noam Chomsky is considered one of the top critical thinkers of our time. His academic achievements and political activism has proved that he is a voice of experience with a strong support of human rights.

Because of his candidness in political expression, because he says the facts that people do not want to hear, he is considered a dissident (and some use the term self-hating).

Chomsky's piece is pure intellect without the emotion. I find his commentaries on world events to generally bring clarity. If people put their emotions in check and hear his words, they'll have a broader view instead of a myopic one.

At no point in the commentary in the URL above did Chomsky condone the daily bombings against Israel, in fact he called them "criminal." He just laid out all the other chess pieces so we can see the game that's being played.

I applaud Chomsky for speaking out, instead of kowtowing to the US media's silence over the years.

YMMV,
Kolleen

very well put



and thanks for posting the article swan
01-21-2009 03:17 PM
Danelle78 I'm personally glad to know more about the US's role in this whole mess. Greed is a terrible thing.
01-21-2009 03:11 PM
Unagidon
Quote:
Originally Posted by crazy_eights View Post
I think that Chomsky picks and chooses his sources and takes them out of context to paint the picture he wants.

Please give me an example from the artcle. One will do.
01-21-2009 02:48 PM
crazy_eights I think that Chomsky picks and chooses his sources and takes them out of context to paint the picture he wants.
01-21-2009 02:44 PM
Unagidon
Quote:
I'm with CMK on this one - it's so over the top in bias that it's (extremely) difficult to take seriously.
I think that in this case, Chomsky quoted many Israeli sources in support of what he says. So are you saying that his sources are wrong or made up, or are you saying that you don't share his conclusions and that this means he must be biased?
01-21-2009 02:36 PM
crazy_eights
Quote:
Originally Posted by Swan3 View Post
Or maybe just a critical thinker? I know both he and Norman Finklestein both share lack of popularity in their community, but I didn't get the impression at all that they were self-hating.

I know so many that have been tarred with the "self-hating" brush, it's really an unfair title that serves only to try and silence a point of view.
I see a lot of unpopular views in "the community" and they don't get called self-hating nor are they silenced. Like I said, one doesn't use the term lightly.

I'm with CMK on this one - it's so over the top in bias that it's (extremely) difficult to take seriously.
01-21-2009 02:31 PM
kolleen9 Noam Chomsky is considered one of the top critical thinkers of our time. His academic achievements and political activism has proved that he is a voice of experience with a strong support of human rights.

Because of his candidness in political expression, because he says the facts that people do not want to hear, he is considered a dissident (and some use the term self-hating).

Chomsky's piece is pure intellect without the emotion. I find his commentaries on world events to generally bring clarity. If people put their emotions in check and hear his words, they'll have a broader view instead of a myopic one.

At no point in the commentary in the URL above did Chomsky condone the daily bombings against Israel, in fact he called them "criminal." He just laid out all the other chess pieces so we can see the game that's being played.

I applaud Chomsky for speaking out, instead of kowtowing to the US media's silence over the years.

YMMV,
Kolleen
This thread has more than 30 replies. Click here to review the whole thread.

Posting Rules  
You may post new threads
You may post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off