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

Participating in an Obsolete Discourse

Expand Messages
  • World View
    Fundamental Misconceptions About Israel, Iran By Joachim Martillo Ethnic Ashkenazim Against Zionist Israel 7/24/2008
    Message 1 of 1 , Aug 1, 2008
    • 0 Attachment
      Fundamental Misconceptions About Israel, Iran
      By Joachim Martillo
      Ethnic Ashkenazim Against Zionist Israel
      7/24/2008
      http://eaazi.blogspot.com/2008/07/participating-in-obsolete-
      discourse.html


      Friday, July 19 Trita Parsi and Roi Ben-Yehuda co-authored an
      article entitled Essential things Israelis and Iranians should know
      about each other<http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1003236.html>
      that appeared in the Israeli newspaper Haaretz (äàøõ). The article
      represented a sophisticated attempt to create a somewhat
      circumscribed space within Neocon-Zionist-dominated American
      discourse to discuss Iranian-Israeli and Iranian-American issues
      rationally.

      Not only does the article's content feel somewhat quaint and
      antiquated because Americans have begun to discuss much more openly
      the pernicious effects of the Israel Lobby on American politics and
      foreign policy, but its reflexive genuflection to demonstrably false
      Zionist beliefs provides good evidence of the problems arising both

      * from discussing Israel and Zionism without a good understanding
      of Eastern European Jewish studies and also
      * from collaboration with an Israeli American fairly thoroughly
      indoctrinated in Zionist-American-Jewish mythology.

      Here is an annotated version of the article. A blue sidebar adjoins
      the original text.

      Essential things Israelis and Iranians should know about each other
      By Trita Parsi and Roi Ben-Yehuda
      http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/1003236.html


      The looming Iran-Israel confrontation has a seemingly deterministic
      quality to it. Listening to the politicians, one gets a sense that
      powers beyond our control are pulling us toward a 21st-century
      disaster. Yet a great deal of the force propelling us into
      confrontation is fueled by ignorance and dehumanization. Israel is
      demonized as "Little Satan," while Iranians are portrayed as
      irrational Muslim extremists.

      Indeed, mutual ignorance of our respective societies plays into the
      hands of the hard-line leaders who are calling for blood and
      destruction. They manipulate and distort; above all, they do
      everything to prevent us from recognizing that the enemy has a face.

      "Hard-line leaders" can get away with distorting the issues because
      far too few members of the public have a sufficiently thorough
      understanding of the Eastern and Central European social political
      cultures from which the State of Israel descends.

      Not that either of us is naive enough to believe that mere knowledge
      of one another will offer a miraculous solution. We do believe,
      however, that mutual understanding will go a long way toward
      allowing us to feel empathy and compassion for each other, and to
      sound off at those calling for bloodshed and war.

      Here are some essential things Iranians and Israelis should know
      about each other:

      1. Israel is a vibrant yet incomplete democracy

      On his visit to the United States last fall, President Mahmoud
      Ahmadinejad famously stated that there are no homosexuals in Iran.
      Well, in Israel there are plenty of homosexuals, and they are the
      only ones in the Middle East who have an annual gay pride parade in
      their capital city.

      The authors' point is unclear.

      Sexual identities represent social constructs. Western "gay-ness"
      does not really exist in Middle Eastern cultures except within
      Israel, which is really a transplanted mixed Central and Eastern
      European Jewish society, which hosts sexual identities that were
      already well-developed among German Jews and Eastern European ethnic
      Ashkenazim by the early 20th century.

      Both groups have been active proselytizers for regendering Western
      society<http://eaazi.blogspot.com/2008/02/jewish-zionist-war-against-
      salvation.html> according to Yiddish models for at least the last 90
      years.

      As Columbia Professor Joseph Massad points out in Desiring Arabs,
      non-Westernized (and many Westernized) Arabs that engage in
      homoeroticism have no interest in the Yiddish regenderization
      program and generally reject Western homosexual identity, which
      Massad calls the Gay International.

      Democracy in Israel means that every citizen and group (Jewish or
      otherwise) has the right to express him/herself and assemble in
      public. Also, that every citizen is equal under the law has voting
      rights, religious freedom, access to education, health care,
      opportunity.

      To believe that non-Jewish citizens are equal in an officially
      Jewish state is logically equivalent to believing that non-white
      citizens would be equal in an officially white state.

      The State of Israel is an Eastern European ethnic fundamentalist
      vkisch racist formal democracy that has aspects of ethnocracy but is
      really dominated by a political military economic oligarchy. Such
      state organizations are common in modern Eastern European history
      and only denial or lack of familiarity with modern Eastern European
      political structures can explain the mischaracterization of the
      Israeli state. All sorts of official and unofficial bias are built
      into the Zionist system. David Kretzmer goes through the legal
      discrimination in detail in The Legal Status of the Arabs in
      Israel<http://books.google.com/books?
      id=lhBrAQAACAAJ&dq=The+Legal+Status+of+the+Arabs+in+Israel>.

      Undoubtedly, Israel's democracy is still a work in progress. The
      fusion of religion and state has limited people's rights and
      freedoms (for example, Israelis of different faiths cannot legally
      marry one another in the country), and the de facto secondary status
      of Israeli Arabs is an affront to the country's democratic ideals.

      Israel does not fuse religion and state in a Jewish counterpart of
      Islamist ideas like al-Islam din wa-dawla.

      Zionist ideology slices and dices Jewish religion in order to
      support an ethnic fundamentalist political program in exactly the
      same way other similar Eastern European political movements like
      Greater Serbianism have used Christian religion.

      While the second class status of Israeli Arabs (a Zionist
      ideological term) may be an affront to American democratic ideals,
      limiting the political voice of Israeli Palestinians (the term
      preferred by most Israeli citizens descended from the native
      Palestinian population<http://eaazi.blogspot.com/2008/04/followup-ii-
      origins-of-modern-jewry.html>) is a fundamental principal of Zionist
      ideology.

      Fortunately, many people in Israel are assiduously working to change
      the system from within.

      Not only is it hard to find Israeli Jews willing even to discuss
      Zionist vkisch racism honestly, but Israeli Jews have no real
      ability to reform the Israeli state because Zionist politics from
      the earliest days of the Zionist settlement until today have been
      completely dominated and controlled by the transnational
      hyperwealthy Jewish political economic oligarchic elite that has
      funded the Zionist movement and the Zionist settlement from the
      beginning

      2. Iran is a vibrant quasi-democracy

      It is far from a full democracy, but neither is it a complete
      dictatorship. Its severe limitations notwithstanding, Iran has a
      lively civil society and possesses most of the building blocks for a
      successful democracy down the road. Iranians' struggle for democracy
      dates back to the 1906 Constitutional Revolution. Since then,
      Iranians have learned two important lessons.

      First, war and democratization don't mix. As tensions between Iran
      and the outside world increase, the first to pay are Iran's pro-
      democracy and human rights activists. For Iran to move toward a
      democratic system, it needs peace and tranquility; bombs and
      surgical strikes will achieve the opposite.

      Second, when you carry out a revolution, you know against whom you
      are revolting, but not necessarily for whom you are waging the
      revolution. Iranians have little appetite for another revolution. As
      unpopular as their current government is, they prefer gradual and
      manageable change.

      3. Streets are named for poets

      Just like Iran, Israel puts great value on the written word. In
      Israel, streets are named for poets - writers who have revived a
      people and its ancient language.

      The official Israeli national poet Chaim Nachman Bialik wrote in
      1934 in The Present Hour:

      "I too, like Hitler, believe in the power of the blood idea."


      Figure 1 Rehov Bialik (Bialik Street) in Tel Aviv


      The claims of national and linguistic revival are simply Zionist
      propaganda.

      The Truth about National Revival

      Tel Aviv University Professor Shlomo
      Sand<http://eaazi.blogspot.com/2008/04/followup-ii-origins-of-modern-
      jewry.html> has correctly pointed out that Judaism spread out from
      Palestine [and Mesopotamia], but the ancient inhabitants of
      Palestine never emigrated from their homeland. Modern ethnic
      Ashkenazim and German Jews have no ancestral connection to Palestine.

      During the 19th century ethnic Ashkenazim began to develop political
      consciousness as a Yiddish ethnic group, which Zionist ideologists
      reinterpreted as a pan-Judaic ethnonational
      group<http://eaazi.blogspot.com/2007/04/how-to-talk-about-zionism-
      new-improved.html> in order to legitimize the theft of Palestine
      from the native population.

      The Truth about Linguistic Revival

      Modern Israeli Hebrew (MIH) is fundamentally relexified Yiddish. The
      vocabulary has some similarity to that of Arabic, but the grammar
      and the meanings of words have much more affinity to Yiddish, German
      and Slavic than to any Semitic language including Biblical or
      Mishnaic Hebrew. (See Les origines des juifs
      actuels<http://eaazi.blogspot.com/2007/12/les-origines-des-juifs-
      actuels.html>, The Origins of Modern
      Jewry<http://eaazi.blogspot.com/2007/10/origins-of-modern-
      jewry.html> and Two-tiered Relexification in Yiddish, Jews, Sorbs,
      Khazars, and the Kiev-Polessian Dialect, by Paul
      Wexler<http://books.google.com/books?
      id=JL7CY2MW63gC&printsec=frontcover>.)

      Except for vocabulary Modern Israeli Hebrew has much more in common
      with Esperanto than with Rabbinic, Mishnaic or Biblical Hebrew.

      It is the pen and imagination, more than the sword and muscle, that
      have been responsible for the creation of this nation.

      The creation of the State of Israel was the result of the joint
      efforts of

      * Jewish economic political oligarchs in the UK and the USA (the
      Cousinhood<http://members.aol.com/ThorsProvoni/JudoniaComplete/Judoni
      aCompleteA.htm#_ftnref186> and Our
      Crowd<http://members.aol.com/ThorsProvoni/JudoniaComplete/JudoniaComp
      leteA.htm#_Toc%20%20199522948>),
      * fanatic Russian Jewish
      intelligentsia<http://eaazi.blogspot.com/2008/04/followup-ii-origins-
      of-modern-jewry.html> and
      * the British military

      in the context of a growing propensity on the part of Eastern
      European ethnic Ashkenazim to use assassination,
      terrorism<http://eaazi.blogspot.com/2008/06/whence-comes-jewish-
      rage.html>, mass murder
      <http://members.aol.com/ThorsProvoni/JudoniaComplete/JudoniaCompleteA
      .htm#_Toc199522969>, ethnic cleansing, and
      genocide<http://eaazi.blogspot.com/2008/07/sarkozy-holocaust-1956-
      versus-today.html> to achieve political goals.

      Israel's historical roots are traced in a book; its people are
      called the "People of the Book"; and its founding father, Theodor
      Herzl, a playwright, liked to write books. It is no surprise then
      that Israel leads the world in new book titles per capita per year.

      The Bible develops the spiritual concept of Israel, but many
      scholars doubt the historicity of ancient Israel, which in any case
      has no connection with the modern vkisch nationalist concept of the
      Jewish people. The phrase "People of the Book" originates with Islam
      and served as the legal basis for tolerance of religious dissenters
      within Islamic society at a time when similar space for freedom of
      belief did not exist in the Christian world.

      Central and Eastern European Jews developed a bookish orientation as
      a persistent side effect of the role that Jewish trading
      networks<http://members.aol.com/ThorsProvoni/JudoniaComplete/JudoniaC
      ompleteA.htm#_Toc199522890> played in the international economy from
      late antiquity and through the 1600s.

      As in Iran, everyday conversations in Israel are as likely to be
      peppered with literary references as with practical concerns.

      4. Iranians are lonely and distrustful

      Much like Israelis, Iranians feel painfully isolated in the Middle
      East. They are surrounded by people with whom they share neither
      language nor religion. Iran is majority Persian and Shi'ite; its
      neighbors are majority Arab and Sunni.

      Nor does Iran have many friends beyond the Middle East. If anything,
      the international community has never treated them fairly, Iranians
      believe. In the last century alo ne, Iranians have contended with
      colonization and decades of foreign intervention, not to mention an
      eight-year war against Saddam Hussein, in which the entire world
      sided with Iraq.

      The United Nations didn't consider Saddam's invasion a threat to
      international peace and security; it took the Security Council more
      than two years to call for a withdrawal. Another five years passed
      before it addressed Saddam's use of chemical weapons. For the
      Iranians, the lesson was clear: When in danger, Iran can rely on
      neither the Geneva Conventions nor the UN Charter for protection.
      Just like Israel, Iran has concluded that it can rely only on itself.

      The above comment ignores a major difference between the Zionist and
      the Iranian relationship with international law.

      The Iranian government has suffered frequent disappointments when
      the international comm unity has refused to apply international law
      in conflicts that have involved Iran. Despite such disappointments
      the Iranian government has persistently reached out to governments
      and peoples throughout the Arab world, Latin America, Eastern
      Europe, the successor states of the Soviet Union, Asia and even to
      the USA in an ongoing effort to improve Iran's international
      relations.

      In contrast, the Israeli government wants to thwart the application
      of international legal principles to the conflict over Palestine so
      that Zionists would be able to deal with the native Palestinian
      population with violence, mass murder, expulsion or however Zionists
      see fit without any external
      interference<http://eaazi.blogspot.com/2007/11/kovel-pulls-no-
      punches.html>. To achieve this goal American Israel advocacy groups
      have an ongoing project of poisoning all discourse of international
      law and human rights<http://eaazi.blogspot.com/2007/10/poisoning-
      human-rights-discourse.html>.

      5. Zionism is not a dirty word

      In a show of disrespect, many leaders in Iran refer to Israel as
      the "Zionist regime." While being called a "regime" may not be
      flattering, for most Israelis, Zionism is not a dirty word.

      From within, Zionism is a national liberation movement, whose aim it
      is to create a safe haven for Jewish people, culture and national
      identity. Zionism is the Jewish people's answer to the centuries-old
      impulse to erase them from history. When Ahmadinejad and his ilk
      speak of Zionism's imminent doom, they are in fact strengthening the
      very movement they seek to eliminate.

      Israelis joke that Israel is the only country in the world where the
      words "dirty Jew" mean a Jew who has not taken a shower. In a way,
      this joke encapsulates the essence of Zionism. Everything else is
      commentary.

      The comment is an attempt to control the discussion of Zionism and
      the State of Israel by depicting normal political analysis as
      equivalent to traditional anti-Jewish slurs.

      Normal Political Analysis

      While most non-Jews and many Jews that study Zionism fairly quickly
      conclude that it represents an extremely repugnant form of racist
      politics, the expression "Zionist regime" is no more disrespectful
      than expressions like socialist regime, liberal regime, Labor
      regime, conservative regime, royalist regime or Tory regime.

      Zionists object to such usage because it separates the politics from
      the government. There is a South African government today, and there
      was a South African government before the end of Apartheid, but the
      Apartheid regime has fallen. Because Zionism is an integralist
      ideology, Zionists are unwilling to tolerate any suggestion that the
      government of the State of Israel might one day have a non-Zionist
      orientation.

      By claiming that critics of Zionists are flinging slurs, Zionists
      have been able to short-circuit any sort of rational comparative
      political analysis of Zionist beliefs and practices, and Zionists
      often manage to argue that Zionism is perfectly legitimate as a
      national liberation movement even though by almost identical logic
      German Nazis could have asserted the legitimacy of German Nazism as
      a national liberation movement.

      Not only do Zionists in general reserve to themselves the right to
      make Hitler analogies while a significant fraction of them rail
      against Islamofascism and accuse Palestinians of pogrom politics,
      but the Zionist intellectual leadership has also worked hard to
      render any comment about the obvious similarities of Zionism and
      German Nazism as beyond the pale of acceptable political speech.

      Zionists have also been running a long term social project to
      indoctrinate the American public with the idea that only anti-Semite
      would compare the Nakba<http://eaazi.blogspot.com/2008/05/massad-
      nakba-mankubin-holoexaleipsis.html>
      (Holoexaleipsis<http://eaazi.blogspot.com/2007/04/holoexaleipsis-
      holocaust-holosphage-and.html>) to the
      Holocaust<http://eaazi.blogspot.com/2008/01/bringing-holocaust-
      religion-to-arabs.html>

      * even though conditions in the Occupied Palestinian Territories
      are generally worse than the situation in German Nazi occupied
      Poland circa 1940 and

      * even though Eastern European ethnic Ashkenazim were up to their
      eyeballs in mass murder, ethnic cleansing and
      genocide<http://eaazi.blogspot.com/2007/02/pattern-of-ethnic-
      ashkenazi.html> long before Hitler invaded the Soviet Union and the
      WW2 mass murder of Jews began.


      Anti-Jewish Slurs

      The term dirty Jews may not in fact originate with anti-Jewish
      gentiles. In Yiddish shmutsike yidn (equivalent to German schmutzige
      Juden) constitute the lowest class of Jews after proste yidn
      <http://eaazi.blogspot.com/2008/01/money-jews-brain-jews-
      politics.html>. Yiddish also provides a euphemism for this class in
      àåøçé ôÌøçé (orkhe porkhe). If treated as loshn-koydesh, this phrase
      means fleeting travelers, itinerants or hoboes, but porkhe is
      probably the Polish word porch, which means a scabby, mangy, low-
      class, mean, stingy, nasty or vulgar person. Porch (adjective
      parszywy) overlaps in connotation to a large extent with shmutsik or
      schmutzig.

      Not only can the traditional Yiddish class terminology still be
      heard in Israel albeit often in Modern Israeli Hebrew calques, but
      far too many Israeli and non-Israeli Jews have no reluctance
      whatsoever to slander Arabs as dirty, and the phrase arabushim
      melukhlakhim is on the lips of far too many Hebrew-speaking Jews.

      Here is an example of Zionist Jewish defamation of Arabs from
      Theodor Herzl's book Alt-Neuland (Old New Land).

      Kingscourt und Friedrich beeilten sich auch fortzukommen. Sie fuhren
      auf der schlechten Eisenbahn nach Jerusalem. Auch auf diesem Wege
      Bilder tiefster Verkommenheit. Das flache Land fast nur Sand und
      Sumpf. Die mageren ker wie verbrannt. Schwzliche Dfer von Arabern.
      Die Bewohner hatten ein rberhaftes Aussehen. Die Kinder spielten
      nackt in Stranstaube.

      Kingscourt and Friedrich hurried to get away. They traveled on the
      miserable railroad to Jerusalem. Even on this route, scenes of the
      deepest depravity. Flat land almost only sand and swamp. The spare
      cultivated fields as if scorched. Colorless villages of Arabs. The
      inhabitants looked like robbers. The children played naked in the
      street dust.

      6. Sympathy with Palestinians, but no desire for conflict with Israel

      Ahmadinejad's venomous rhetoric notwithstanding, Iranians don't
      spend much time thinking about Israel. They are far more concerned
      about Iran's crippled economy and rampant corruption. While the
      sympathies of most Iranians fall squarely with the Palestinians,
      this is not an issue they feel their country must be a ctively
      involved in.

      Likewise, few populations or governments that considered Apartheid
      South Africa or Nazi Germany repugnant were spoiling for a war with
      either of these two states.

      Yet as Jabotinskian Zionist political power wanes in the USA and
      Zionist Jewish political economic oligarchs come under increasing
      scrutiny, now may not be the time to enter into polite
      discussion<http://eaazi.blogspot.com/2007/04/zioshmooze-vs-plain-
      english.html> with American Zionists.

      As more and more gentile and Jewish Americans become critical or
      even hostile to the State of Israel, proposing an American tilt from
      Israel to Iran makes a lot of sense.

      Such a political shift is hardly unprecedented in American history.
      Under President Nixon, the United States recognized the PRC as the
      legal government of China despite more than two decades of alliance
      with the RoC.

      Because of the damage that Jabotinksian Neocon Zionists have caused
      the USA<http://eaazi.blogspot.com/2008/07/one-economic-crisis-or-
      two.html>, Americans might be willing to entertain an even more
      radical shift in foreign policy.

      Neocons and Zionist Americans have no problem with regime change,
      invasion, and massive population dislocation in Arab and Muslim
      countries. Not only is turnabout is fair play, but the Zionist
      intelligentsia and its allies shamelessly argue for military
      intervention in the Sudan ethough there is a far better argument for
      regime change, invasion, and forced transfer of (Zionist interloper)
      population in the case of Israel than there ever was in the case of
      Iraq or is in the case of the Sudan. As a side effect of declaring
      Israel a terrorist enemy state, the US government could force those
      responsible for wrecking the US economy
      <http://eaazi.blogspot.com/2008/07/one-economic-crisis-or-two.html>
      to pony up the cash and assets to fix it. At the very least, if the
      USA treated Israel as an enemy state, Arabs and Muslims would no
      longer consider American leaders hypocritical in claiming to support
      democracy, human rights and anti-racism.

      Iranians will fiercely defend their independence and territory, yet
      they have no desire for conflict with Israel. Iranians remember
      Alexander's sacking of Persia, the Arab conquest in the seventh
      century C.E., the Mongol invasion, and the 1953 CIA coup against
      Iran's democratically elected prime minister. But there is no
      recollection of any conflict with the Jewish people because there
      hasn't been one. Most Iranians would like to keep it that way.

      Of course, Iranians have no historical memory of conflict with the
      Jewish people. The Jewish people is a modern construct
      <http://mondediplo.com/2008/05/18invented> less than 200 years old.
      Conversely modern German and E. European Yiddish Jews have no
      historical relationship with Persian-speakers even if some of the
      ancestral pre-Ashkenazi populations

      * that lived in the region of the Black sea and
      * that were probably incorporated into the Judaizing Khazar
      empire <http://eaazi.blogspot.com/2007/10/origins-of-modern-
      jewry.html> may have had kinship connections to populations within
      neighboring Iranian political entities.

      Yet Zionists do have scriptural sources like the Book of Esther that
      can be used to incite hostility against Iranians
      <http://eaazi.blogspot.com/2008/04/followup-ii-origins-of-modern-
      jewry.html>, and no Iranian political entity, whatever its
      ideological or religious orientation, is likely to accept
      permanently a status quo in which any Levantine entity has hegemony
      over a region that Iranian states have historically considered their
      natural geopolitical sphere of influence.

      Roi Ben-Yehuda is an Israeli-American writer living in Spain. He is
      a regular contributer to Jewcy and France 24. His blog can be read
      at Roi's Word Weblog<http://roiword.wordpress.com/>

      Dr. Trita Parsi is the author of "Treacherous Alliance - The Secret
      Dealings of Israel, Iran and the US" Yale University Press, 2007), a
      Silver Medal Recipient of the Council on Foreign Relations' Arthur
      Ross Book Award, the most significant award for a book on foreign
      affairs. www.tritaparsi.com<http://www.tritaparsi.com/>

      *********************************************************************

      WORLD VIEW NEWS SERVICE

      To subscribe to this group, send an email to:
      wvns-subscribe@yahoogroups.com

      NEWS ARCHIVE IS OPEN TO PUBLIC VIEW
      http://finance.groups.yahoo.com/group/wvns/

      Need some good karma? Appreciate the service?
      Please consider donating to WVNS today.
      Email ummyakoub@... for instructions.

      To leave this list, send an email to:
      wvns-unsubscribe@yahoogroups.com
    Your message has been successfully submitted and would be delivered to recipients shortly.