Will the Jews win

To the person who googled that and found my blog, the answer is yes. But it's a secret, so shhhh...

Back from Charleston

Trip was good. Visited my uncles David and Michael, who retired there.

Ate fairly well. Not hard there for a pescatarian, especially one who grew up in Maryland eating crab every summer. Soo, my wife, who doesn't eat seafood, had more difficulty.

It was somewhat unnerving to see many statues and plaques dedicated to soldiers who died in "War between the states." I was constantly wondering if the recognition of the history of slavery was enough. Certainly, at times, it wasn't, though I did welcome several places where it was recognized. We went on a tour of a historic house. The downside of slavery was presented in one sentence of a 45 min (including walking time) recorded audio tour. Soo got the feeling it was even 'romanticized.'

Bomb plot

Surely you've heard by now about the plot to bomb two synagogues in New York.

So when will it be ok to be racist?

Jessie's got a roundup which links to a clip of Jay Smooth on Asher Roth. (Embedded below.) Like most of Jay's stuff, it's really good. And widely applicable to anti-racism. He points out the absurdity of those who think getting past race means not having to care about each others' humanity. It's video, so the following is my attempt to transcribe a particularly well-put portion:

Respecting each others' humanity is such a pain in the ass. Do we really have to do this forever. Can't you all just lighten up so I don't have to respect you anymore? Isn't the whole point of coming together as one that I don't have to care what you think? And then some of us go all the way crazy [and we] think we need to prove to everyone that being past racism means being freed from the unfair burden of ever having to care how we affect each other.

Taking that general principle and applying it to antisemitism, there are all sorts of people who think that, since antisemitism isn't a major problem anymore that it's ok to be antisemitic. Think about that! Of course, I think these people understate the problem of antisemitism, but even if they were right about that, there's still a lot of problem with such a sentiment.

This was the major theme of Michael Neumann's essay "What is Anti-Semitism [sic]?" which leads Alexander Cockburn's The Politics of Anti-Semitism [sic]. He argued:

I think we should almost never take antisemitism seriously, and maybe we should have some fun with it.

Jay notes (I have to apologize, since I would normally refer to him by last name; but I can't bring myself to write [Mr.] Smooth) Roth is young and sorting some stuff out. He's doing it in front of a mass audience, which means he really doesn't have that liberty, but still. Neumann is, by contrast, what Jay calls crazy.

And yet, Neumann is apparently still a professor at Trent University (in the name of academic freedom, it might be that this should remain so, but it is pertinent that he retains a position of power) and has been massively influential in the anti-Zionist movement.

Don't ask Alice

From the department of not really coincidences. Not long ago I rejected a comment from a certain Alice, who wrote:

i have read any holy books, in bold jews about. Actually I can not believe in jews forever !
They rabbis absolutely a liers !

Today, I chance upon Alice again:

what improve ?
jews before and after Moses was
unbelieved humans.
Read your bible carefully.

I had assumed the poor English was the result of not being a native speaker and that the antisemitism was too poorly translated to understand. But now I'm just thinking she's crazy and doesn't think Jews exist. If you mention Israel at some point, you, too, may get a visit from Alice.

It wouldn't be so painful, actually, if she didn't use the word actually. Like PG, I actually tend to overuse the word, actually a lot.

Heads, Nazis win; Tails, Jews lose

Bob points to this little spat at Indymedia NYC. (New York, for anyone who didn't know, is where I live. It is also the last place most people assume antisemitism exists.) It follows a story about the recent case of an Austrian hotelier which declared it will not allow Jewish guests. A blatant case of discrimination which (if I understand Bob correctly) Contested Terrain posted to Indymedia. Someone responds:

Hey you Zionazi shit.

You can readily identify Zionazis, as they're the ones who find discrimination against Jews distasteful. (I'm not really sure, but I actually don't think CT is a Zionist. I think he's more of an anarchist, in an anti-Deutsch mold. UPDATE: CT describes his views in the comments.) Then there's a response from someone Bob describes as "more sensible." This more sensible poster begins:

so do the zionists pay you to say things this stupid and offensive and blatantly anti semetic?

Of course, it's meant as a joke. Or at least I think it is. But what I find not so funny is how it uses antisemitic conspiracism as an explanation for antisemitism. Continuing:

hey indymedia, this is why no one gives a shit about this site! for the millionth time, anti semitism (or provacteur bullshit like this, which amounts to the same thing and means you are actually probably also doing free pr for israel's foreign policy by letting it be posted)

The problem with antisemitism, as depicted here, isn't that it will harm Jews. The problem is that it will hurt Indymedia's reputation. (It also, maybe, describes a sort of Jewish control, just shy of conspiracy.)

does exist, independent of whatever israel does or does not do, existed before israel and is as bad as racism in addition to dumbing down and poisoning the well for any kind of intelligent political debate.

Well, that's at least a bit better. But, "as bad as racism"? Funny how even the anti-racist bit manages to set us apart.

All in all, more sensible is a bit of a low standard.

But to oppose antisemitism is understood as 'coming out' as a Jew. Like a straight guy who won't put up with homophobic jokes. The explanation is that the straight guy is gay. Or the anti-racist who becomes a "nigger-lover." Whether antisemites use the straightforward "Jew" or the more circumspect "Zionazi" doesn't much matter - that dynamic is more important.

Vaclav Havel on the UNHRC

A few days old. (Via.) Havel doesn't get into how this specifically affects Israel, but he does put this up:

Only 20 countries are running for 18 open seats. The seats are divided among the world’s five geographic regions and three of the five regions have presented the same number of candidates as there are seats, thus ensuring there is no opportunity to choose the best proponents of human rights each region has to offer.

It's just one example of how a great deal of work in the UN is done in regional groups. Israel is generally denied a regional group because its region refuses to recognize it. Sometimes it is allowed to participate as a pretend European state. Generally it is denied participation.

To those people who protest that the UN isn't democratic because of the Security Council: How would you propose to ensure the democratic rights of Jews?