Loading ...
Sorry, an error occurred while loading the content.

Re: [smygo] Chomsky's Boycott

Expand Messages
  • Ilan Shalif
    Means are not justified by end they do not serve. Anarchists who claime that the end justify their unacceptable means are either cheating or ignorance. ...
    Message 1 of 4 , Feb 7, 2011
    • 0 Attachment
      Means are not justified by end they do not serve.
      Anarchists who claime that the end justify their unacceptable means are either cheating or
      ignorance.

      Echo of Freedom wrote:
      >
      >
      > > It is not skepticism about the effectiveness of this tactic. It is
      > just a way to cover up
      > > the objection to do all the means needed to force the Israelis to end
      > their crimes against
      > > the Palestinians.
      >
      Some people are reluctant to use all the means that are needed for putting end to the
      Israeli occupation that are compatible with our education for anarchism but harm the
      Zionist community, are still emmotionaly tied to the zionist project of building Israel.
      >
      > I know that there's a lot to reply to here, but i will focus on this
      > last point,
      > as it explains the whole issue rather well.
      >
      > It is *not* usefull to do "all the means needed" for anything.
      >
      To kill a nasty person for stopping his mall behavior is example of bad means for good end.
      >
      > The main point of anarchism is that means and ends go together. You do not
      > install a dictatorial system which then in a few generations is suppose to
      > wither away.
      >
      The claim that installing a dictatorial system which then in a few generations was wrong
      because of two main reasons. The installing a dictatorial system was not the best mean to
      prevent restoration of capitalism. The second wrong reason is that dictatorial system
      wither after a few generations into capitalism.
      >
      > It does make sense to boycott commercial institutions, which have direct
      > contribution to the Israeli state, but does not make any sense to boycott
      > academics who have no input into it.
      >
      Say who? If you are ignorant about the dynamics of the Israeli society you can claim lot
      of things and your motivations are questionable.
      >
      Academics who support the Zionist settler colonialism project contribut to its strength.

      The effects of successful acts of boycot contribute a lot to the demoralization of the
      Israeli public and elite that support the occupation.

      Any success in one subject of boycott contribute to all the other subjects.
      >
      > The mention that Germany in 1930s also have had academics was made. And
      > one of
      > the leading sexuality institutes was in fact in Berlin, until it was
      > destroyed
      > by the Nazi state (for the publications dealing with homosexuality). It
      > would
      > make no sense to call for its boycott prior to destruction based just on the
      > fact that it was geographically located in Germany.
      >
      All the Israeli academic institutes support the Israeli state even when the more liberals
      have some criticism.

      It is authoritarian from people who pretend to be antiauthoritarian to attack the Israeli
      academians who call for boycott of the Israeli academian institute.

      Ilan S.
      member of the Israeli Anarchists Against the Wall
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.