A new blog that'll be well-worth reading launches today South Jerusalem by Gershom Gorenberg & Haim Watzman. They're promising "A Progressive, Skeptical Blog on Israel, Judaism, Culture, Politics, and Literature."
« Tea Leaves | Main | Wire Finale »
South Jerusalem
09 Mar 2008 05:11 pm
Comments (33)
There's a niche that's been waiting to be filled: self-critical commentary about Jews and Israel from a leftish perspective. Now all we need is some brave Jew to blaze a path in self-deprecating comedy about his neuroses.
"Now all we need is some brave Jew to blaze a path in self-deprecating comedy about his neuroses."
Uhm, wouldn't that be just about every Jewish comic for the last sixty years? The Borscht Belt ground them out for decades.
Uhm, wouldn't that be just about every Jewish comic for the last sixty years? The Borscht Belt ground them out for decades.
irony 1 |ˈīrənē; ˈiərnē|
noun ( pl. -nies)
the expression of one's meaning by using language that normally signifies the opposite, typically for humorous or emphatic effect.
I was going to say something like "just what we need, another anti-semitic blog by a self-hating jew." But I was beaten to the joke...
I was going to say something like "just what we need, another anti-semitic blog by a self-hating jew." But I was beaten to the joke...
I guess we really have crossed into the portion of our world's history when criticism of any of Israel's actions or policies proves, ipso facto, that the criticizer is an anti-Semite, or a self-hating Jew.
Gershom Gorenberg doesn't need to prove his fidelity to Israel or the Jewish people to anyone, thanks.
"I guess we really have crossed into the portion of our world's history when criticism of any of Israel's actions or policies proves, ipso facto, that the criticizer is an anti-Semite, or a self-hating Jew."
Good point Freddie. That's why it takes such courage for folks like Gorenberg, Watzman and Matt Yglesias to do what they do. They've all taken the risk of being denounced by Marty Peretz and being ostracized from social functions at their local Chabad House and are now forced to hang out only with cool and trendy young liberals after taking such unpopular stands.
Aside to Richard Steven Hack: Please see James Gary's definition of irony above if necessary.
Why should anyone care if a position is "courageous" or not? Surely what matters is whether it is right or wrong. BTW, Gorenberg and Watzman actually live in Israel, where perhaps their positions are not quite as popular among "trendy young liberals" as you seem to imagine.
You're ignoring the point, Fred: JWill has explicitly conflated "Progressive, Skeptical" discussion of Israel with anti-Semitism and Jewish self-hatred. So is that really the case? Is any interrogation of Israel's actions and policies that isn't aggressively supportive really anti-Semitic or evidence of self-hatred? Is the bar really that low? Answer the question.
Gorenberg and Watzman are just a couple of naive left wingers who have convinced themselves that if they are sufficiently nice to the Palestinians the latter will be nice to them. Unfortunately, the Palestinians aren't interested in reciprocating nice. They are only interested in killing as many Israelis as they can. Gorenberg and Watzman will have to learn the same lesson that Neville Chamberlain learned in 1939. There are some people who are totally evil and business cannot be done with them.
And what's your final solution for the Palestinians, SLC? What do you advocate be done to them?
"Gorenberg and Watzman actually live in Israel, where perhaps their positions are not quite as popular among "trendy young liberals""
You wouldn't know it by what they write, but the positions Gorenberg takes are way out of the Israeli mainstream. He is farther to the left than the labor party. So essentialy 90% of Israelis are to the right of what he is saying. So when he offers "an Israeli persepective" keep in mind that his perspective is no closer to the average Israelis than Cynthia Mckinney perspective is that of the average american.
SLC,
If you're ever interested in reading a history book that's not about Neville Chamberlain in 1938, I suggest the topic of the Austrian Foreign Ministry in 1914. They decided that they couldn't compromise with evil, murderous nationalist terrorists. Funny, it didn't actually work out that well for them.
Gordo,
That's probably why they call it "an Israeli perspective" and not "the Israeli perspective."
Freddie and Fred, to quote James Gary:
irony 1 |ˈīrənē; ˈiərnē|
noun ( pl. -nies)
the expression of one's meaning by using language that normally signifies the opposite, typically for humorous or emphatic effect.
So essentialy 90% of Israelis are to the right of what he is saying.
Well, 20% of Israelis are Arab Palestinians and they wouldn't argue too much with any of this..of course their opinions don't count for much which I guess is it's own point.
Re William Burns
Mr. Burns is partially correct relative to the Austrian perspective about the assassination of the crown prince in Sarajevo. What he fails to consider is the following.
1. The great powers in Europe were all engaged in an arms race, particularly the Dreadnought competition between Germany and Great Britain. Europe was a tinderbox.
2. The great powers in Europe were entangled in the alliances of the Triple Entente and the Triple Alliance which required them to support other members of their mutual defense treaties
3. Once the machinery of mobilization began to operate, there was no way to stop it.
Mr. Burns should consult Barbara Tuchmans' classic book, "The Guns of August for a painstaking description of why the First World War started.
Thus, I would argue that if Russia and Germany had sat back and allowed Austria and Serbia to settle the issues between them, it is likely that they would have dons so peacefully. The war began because Russia insisted on supporting Serbia and Germany insisted on supporting Austria and their clients were thus encouraged to hold out for the maximum concessions from the opposition.
I'm afraid, JWill, that perhaps you are the one who has to read that definition-- even if you meant the opposite of what you wrote, you didn't achieve irony.
SLC don't duck the question. Since you think there's no talking to the Palestinians, who you say are universally bent on murdering Israelis, what do you propose be done to them?
Yeah, that's what happens when great powers get too close to their client states.
Re Freddie
The Palestinians terrorists have to be totally defeated so that their dream of controlling all of Palestine becomes a nightmare for them, just as Germany and Japan had to be totally defeated in WW 2. This will require the Government of Israel to stop futzing around and take the actions necessary to inflict total defeat on them. There is no substitute for victory. Victory isn't everything, it's the only thing.
What does totally defeated mean? Outcast from Palestine?
I don't get your comparison with WWII, by the way. The Palestinians are a powerless, impoverished people with limited control of their quasi-nation. And that merits comparison to the Axis, one of the most powerful military mobilizations in history?
Re Freddie
Total victory means the following for starters
1. Palestinians must cease and desist from their terrorist activities. For example, cease firing qassems into Sderot, and sending homicide bombers to blow up pizza parlors.
2. The Palestinian Authority must ceast and desist from its hate campaign in Palestinian Schools.
To achieve total victory, the IDF must be unleashed to crush the opposition, just like the German and Japanese opposition had to be crushed in WW 2. To start with, the Palestinians must be told in no uncertain terms that continuation of their terrorist activities from the Gaza Strip will result in the imposition of Hama rules therein, and the IDF must be prepared to carry out that strategy in the event of noncompliance by the other side. The imposition of Hama rules by Hafaz Assad in Syria was most effective in stopping terrorist activities emanating from the Syrian City of Hama and that imposition should be equally effective in stopping terrorist activities emanating from the Gaza Strip. This approach is brutal but in order to make an omelet, one has to break a few egg shells.
OK I agree with 1. and 2. both... but I think the way to get there is to create a legitimate state for the Palestinians, rather than a harshly ruled, garrison state of cantons with no meaningful sovereignty or self-determination.
Number 1, of course, is non-negotiable-- it's an absolute must, and those who would argue otherwise don't have a leg to stand on. The failure is in the refusal to acknowledge that attacks on Palestinian civilians are equally terrible, should be equally impermissible, and can't be dismissed by appeals to intentionality.
SLC is referring to the brutal suppression of the Hama uprising, in which over 25,000 people were murdered by the Syrian Baathist dictatorship.
"No substitute for victory" "Can't make an omelette without breaking eggs." Do you have a single thought that's not an empty cliche, SLC? On the other hand, if the massacre you advocate for ever takes place, I assure you there will be no need for a hate campaign in Palestinian schools.
in which over 25,000 people were murdered by the Syrian Baathist dictatorship
I think you mean *eggs*, not people.
I think you mean *eggs*, not people.
No, justinb, he means *Palestinians*. Otherwise, your points stands.
Adam,
SLC is referring to the brutal suppression of the Hama uprising, in which over 25,000 people were murdered by the Syrian Baathist dictatorship.
Maybe SLC uses an edition of the siddur where we pray to be able to slaughter 25,000 innocent, impoverished people so we can take their land.
Oh, and SLC? You could madlib your comment into a manifesto for any terrorist group currently killing Israelis in the Occupied Territories. Congratulations -- you've reductio ad absurdum'ed zionism.
Have they been declared to be self-hating yet?
Re Adam
Mr. Adam has incorrectly described the 1982 events in the Syrian City of Hama as an uprising. It was nothing of the sort. What happed was that terrorist attacks were being carried out in Syria by terrorists operating from Hama and the object of the bombardment of the city was to demonstrate to the terrorists therein that their actions would not be tolerated. The operation achieved its objectives as the terrorist campaign in Syria came to an abrupt cessation. See the book "From Beirut to Jerusalem," by Thomas Friedman for the gory details.
Re William Burns
I'm with President Roosevelt and Prime Minister Churchill who could not have cared less whether the German people hated them because of the strategic bombing campaign during WW 2.
Re Freddie
The trouble with Mr. Freddies' position is that he is operating under the notion that being nice to the Palestinians will result in their reciprocating that niceness. Unfortunately, the Palestinian terrorists interpret niceness as weakness and proceed accordingly.
James, in my defense, Fred isn't known for his irony.
Freddie: "So is that really the case? Is any interrogation of Israel's actions and policies that isn't aggressively supportive really anti-Semitic or evidence of self-hatred? Is the bar really that low?"
Are you familiar with the term "New Anti-Semitism"? Look in up in Wikipedia.
Yes, the bar has been set that low. It's even coded into the European hate laws, unfortunately. Eventually it will be here, too. Be critical of Israel, go to Guantanamo. That's why the DHS was promoting some sort of law to boost up their ability to crack down on "domestic terrorists", i.e., anybody critical of the US - or Israel.
SLC: "Unfortunately, the Palestinian terrorists interpret niceness as weakness and proceed accordingly."
s/Palestinian/Israeli/g
That Perl expression should fix that sentence for you, SLC.
Apparently, a cease fire is in the works for the Gaza Strip/Israeli border. The Palestinians terrorists will, of course, use the cease fire to rearm and prepare for the next outbreak of terrorism. Eventually, the current weaklings running the Government of Israel will be replaced by stern individuals who will crack down with unlimited violence and stop the terrorist attacks once and for all.
http://web.israelinsider.com/Articles/Diplomacy/12704.htm
Comments closed March 23, 2008.
| 
Heads in the Sand
It won't be as good as Gershom's, but I too have a new(ly dusted off) blog.
(Since it's Sunday, and I'm a long time commenter, I hope I can be forgiven that wee bit of self-promotion. Won't happen again.)
Posted by southpaw | March 9, 2008 6:26 PM