I admit to having looked through the on-line pages of the racist rag, "The New Republic" lately. Never do i receive even the slightest insight about Middle East politics from these Sharon-ists. Their views on the Palestine/Israel issues always veer closely to (and sometimes cross into) representations that resemble classic anti-semitic depictions of Jews. But here the anti-semitism and hostility is directed against Arabs, usually.
Famed zionist apologist, Michael Walzer has recently entered the fray on debates about Israel's attack on Lebanon. Here is how he describes Hezbollah and Hamas: "enemy whose hostility is extreme, explicit, unrestrained, and driven by an ideology of religious hatred," or later as a movement that "does not recognize the legal and moral principle of noncombatant immunity."
Wow! If this is not an accurate description of religious-chauvinist state of Israel, i don't know what is. Even if his simplistic description of Hamas and Hezbollah were correct (and it could not be, given the differences of each), these words from this non-scholar of the Middle East fit far more accurately the positions, actions, and chauvinisms of Israel, a state that has killed Arab "non-combatants" in their tens of thousands, dating back to 1948. When looks at Israel statistics, it is safe to say that Israel has killed 50 times the number of innocent civilians that Hezbollah and Hamas have.
A little self-reflection, dear Walzer.
That Hezbollah and Hamas became militant organizations _in response to Israeli conquest and colonization of Lebanon and Palestine_ seems entirely lost to many as racist as Walzer. Decades before either of these groups were formed, Israel had stolen Palestinian and Lebanese land, set up and apartheid-state where only Israeli-Jews are given full rights, and set up a land regime where non-Jews are restricted from owning or leasing land in more than 75% of the former Palestine.
If such religious chauvinism were conducted on, say, the Moon, the lunar-zionists would simply be engaging in racism (the sort that was committed against Jews in much of Europe). But Israel was built ALMOST COMPLETELY on stolen Palestinian land, which makes this racist state a colonial one, as well.
With current Israeli discourse talking openly about re-taking areas of a soverign Lebanon (while refusing to return stolen Palestinian land to Palestinians) its incumbent on all who care about human rights to call out Walzerian-style bigotry and religious chauvinism.
For a splendid critique of Walzer's earlier "scholarship" see the essay by the late Edward Said in BLAMING THE VICTIMS.
The essay is entitled:
"Michael Walzer's Exodus and Revolution : A Canaanite Reading" (1986).
Famed zionist apologist, Michael Walzer has recently entered the fray on debates about Israel's attack on Lebanon. Here is how he describes Hezbollah and Hamas: "enemy whose hostility is extreme, explicit, unrestrained, and driven by an ideology of religious hatred," or later as a movement that "does not recognize the legal and moral principle of noncombatant immunity."
Wow! If this is not an accurate description of religious-chauvinist state of Israel, i don't know what is. Even if his simplistic description of Hamas and Hezbollah were correct (and it could not be, given the differences of each), these words from this non-scholar of the Middle East fit far more accurately the positions, actions, and chauvinisms of Israel, a state that has killed Arab "non-combatants" in their tens of thousands, dating back to 1948. When looks at Israel statistics, it is safe to say that Israel has killed 50 times the number of innocent civilians that Hezbollah and Hamas have.
A little self-reflection, dear Walzer.
That Hezbollah and Hamas became militant organizations _in response to Israeli conquest and colonization of Lebanon and Palestine_ seems entirely lost to many as racist as Walzer. Decades before either of these groups were formed, Israel had stolen Palestinian and Lebanese land, set up and apartheid-state where only Israeli-Jews are given full rights, and set up a land regime where non-Jews are restricted from owning or leasing land in more than 75% of the former Palestine.
If such religious chauvinism were conducted on, say, the Moon, the lunar-zionists would simply be engaging in racism (the sort that was committed against Jews in much of Europe). But Israel was built ALMOST COMPLETELY on stolen Palestinian land, which makes this racist state a colonial one, as well.
With current Israeli discourse talking openly about re-taking areas of a soverign Lebanon (while refusing to return stolen Palestinian land to Palestinians) its incumbent on all who care about human rights to call out Walzerian-style bigotry and religious chauvinism.
For a splendid critique of Walzer's earlier "scholarship" see the essay by the late Edward Said in BLAMING THE VICTIMS.
The essay is entitled:
"Michael Walzer's Exodus and Revolution : A Canaanite Reading" (1986).
posted by thomasabowd at 11:17 PM
0 Comments:
Post a Comment
<< Home