Bill and Ben
This is a guest post by Seismic Shock.
Meet Bill. Bill is an evangelical Anglican Christian who has spent a few summers on kibbutz in Israel, and has a degree in English Literature. Although he is now based in Buenos Aires, Bill spends much of his time blogging about the situation in Israel, and is concerned with the rise of global antisemitism. Rumoured to be the son of a priest, Bill thinks that in fact, the Anglican Church worries too much about being “even-handed” when it comes to Israel-Palestine, and shouldn’t worry about Christian-Muslim relations so much, but should just stick up for the beleaguered Israelis in Sderot and Ashkelon.
But although Bill claims that he cares about the suffering of Israelis, his care for them seems a bit suspect. Bill, you see, is a Kach supporter. Bill thinks that it is only Kach who have not sold out their values about the need for armed resistance, and sees the Israeli political system as characterised by corruption, as Israelis put their local business interests and the ‘peace process’ above resistance. Bill calls for an end to Israeli and international bans on Kach – after all, how hypocritical can the world be if it maintains diplomatic relations with Sudan but not Kach?
Whilst Bill occasionally distances himself from the anti-Arab ideology of Kach, he doesn’t think that liberal Arab political movements can be truly liberal. He himself is not violent, although he considers Kach’s violent actions and his own non-violent actions against Islamic states as ‘two sides of the same coin’. Bill does not consider Kach to be full of religious extremists, but instead as a legitimate nationalist movement which Christians can pray for.
Although he is a virulent opponent to Islamism because of its religious-nationalistic violence, Bill’s own glorification of the religious-nationalistic violence of Kach suggests to many people that his concern is not peace and justice, but instead Bill is simply prejudiced against Muslims.
Bill wrote an article a couple of years ago on an internet site, in which he asked: ‘Is it possible to “understand” the rise in “anti-Muslim bigotry”?’. Responding to recent statistics showing a rise in negative attitudes towards Muslims across Europe, Bill wrote:
I was somewhat startled by this, since I do not consider myself an anti-Muslim bigot, yet I can also understand why some are. There are, in fact, a number of reasons. One is the state of Sudan, its ideology of racial supremacy and its subsequent crimes committed against the residents of Darfur. It is because Islamists have always sought to equate their totalitarian project with Islam that some misguidedly respond to what they see on their televisions with attacks on Muslims or Muslim property.
…
I have just provided a by no means comprehensive list of reasons why “I can understand very well that some people are unpleasant towards Muslims.” I do not agree with them, but I can understand.
Yet Bill couldn’t understand unpleasantness when it stared him in the face. When a mosque was firebombed in Scotland last year, Bill considered the situation to be suspicious (after all, Bill reasoned, who would firebomb a mosque which is next to a fire station?), and also to be an attack on his freedoms. Although Bill can understand why some people might be vicious to Muslims, he can’t understand why some people might arrest those plotting violent crimes against Muslims.
Back in 2001, Bill cheerily commented on Momcilo Krajisnik’s denial of his role in the genocide against non-Serbs. Bill explained:
When Krajisnik said: “I believe in God and in justice and I believe that truth will triumph,” he is drawing attention to the extent to which European nations prosecute genocide deniers, yet are by and large post-Christian societies with little regard for religion. For a devout Orthodox believer like the Serbian leader, this must seem like a strange situation.
Of the massacres of Srebrenica, Bill wrote:
Srebrenica comes to symbolize the intrinsic anti-Muslim racism of ‘dhimmi’ societies, and therefore proving the need for Islamic states. More disturbingly perhaps, Srebrenica as a standard for human depravity set so high, that any treatment of Israelis is justifiable, as long as it falls short of what was experienced by the Bosnians at Sreberenica.
Bill also wrote an article praising American evangelicals who use the Bible to claim that all Muslim states should be dismantled, some of whom had shown hostility and insensitivity towards Muslims. Bill wants to see a global boycott of Muslim states, and thinks that anyone who opposes this is an Islamist.
Yet Bill is not an Islamophobe, he assures us, and warns us that to accuse him of being an anti-Muslim racist would be to lend power to real racists such as Nazis or people who belong to governments of Islamic states.
The Bill whom I have portrayed does not exist, and were he to exist, his views would be considered as racist. Yet whilst Bill’s views would be rightly rejected by the left-leaning clergy at Fulcrum, the same clergy happily promote Ben’s views.
Ben is an evangelical Anglican Christian. Having spent a few summers in the West Bank, Ben is now based in Sao Paolo, Brazil, and writes and blogs about Zionism and Israel-Palestine.
Ben has argued that it is possible to understand why some people are antisemites.
He writes:
“I do not consider myself an anti-Semite, yet I can also understand why some are. There are, in fact, a number of reasons. One is the state of Israel, its ideology of racial supremacy and its subsequent crimes committed against the Palestinians. It is because Zionists have always sought to equate their colonial project with Judaism that some misguidedly respond to what they see on their televisions with attacks on Jews or Jewish property.”
…
I have just provided a by no means comprehensive list of reasons why “I can understand very well that some people are unpleasant towards Jews.” I do not agree with them, but I can understand.To interpret agreement with this statement as an indication of anti-Semitism is wrong and intellectually flawed. It can only contribute to real anti-Semitism by the creation of hysteria and polarisation that real racists thrive on, whether they are in a slum in Marseille, a dinner party in Berlin, or the Knesset.
He has repeatedly attacked Zionism as well as lambasting Fatah members for putting local business interests before the resistance. He argues for an end to the international boycott of Hamas, and views Hezbollah as a legitimate, non-jihadist nationalist movement which Christians can pray for. He has accused the Anglican Church of placing too high a value on Jewish-Christian relations. He denies that liberal Zionism truly is liberal. He considers non-violent action against Israel as ‘a means to an end’, and alongside anti-Zionist violence as ‘two sides of the same coin.’
He has tried to contextualise Mahmoud Ahmadinejad’s Holocaust denial as a rational, religious response to the way the Holocaust has become unquestionable in a post-Christian Europe. He wrote:
The news agency goes on though to report that the President described how “some have created a myth on holocaust and hold it even higher than the very belief in religion and prophets because when a person expresses disbelief in God, religion and prophets they do not object to him but they will protest to anyone who would reject the Holocaust”. Again, Ahmadinejad is drawing attention to the extent to which European nations prosecute Holocaust deniers, yet are by and large post-Christian societies with little regard for religion. For a devout believer like the Iranian President, this must seem like a strange situation.
…
The Holocaust comes to symbolize the intrinsic anti-Jewish racism of ‘Gentile’ societies, and therefore proving the need for a Jewish state. More disturbingly perhaps, the Holocaust acts as a standard for human depravity set so high, that any treatment of the Palestinians is justifiable, as long as it falls short of what was experienced by the Jews in Nazi Europe.
He viewed a failed bomb plot at a synagogue as an attack on ‘our freedoms’. Although Bill can understand why some people might be vicious to Jews, he can’t understand why some people might arrest those plotting violent crimes against Jews.
All in all, Bill and Ben have some pretty unpleasant views. Their outlooks on global politics are not entirely symmetrical, but there are clear similarities. So if no anti-racist left-winger would ever want to be associated with Bill, why would any anti-racist left-winger want to be associated with Ben?
Comments
| 13 June 2009, 12:17 pm |
Bill doesn’t seem to have had as much success as Ben in the self-promotion and milking-milking-milking-the-apartheid-analogy-for-all-its-worth-and-then-some departments.
| 13 June 2009, 12:21 pm |
Any group which supports racism towards another group is truly wrong whether they be Jewish/Israeli or Muslim.
If one were to compare antisemitism amongst Muslims versus Islamaphobia amongst Jews/Israelis then there is no comparison.
On one hand we are speaking of a maximum potential for 1,8bn Muslims versus the maximum potential of 13m Jews.
There is no mainstream Islamaphobia from either Israelis or Jews. Whenever some nutter Rabbi makes an outrageous statement they are roundly condemned. Contrary there IS mainstream antisemitism from Muslims and Arab countries. Its a historical hatred from Mohammed’s day and manifest in many incident of slaughter of Jews in Arab countries.
No-one means ALL Muslims just as no-one thinks that all people who read Mein Kampf are/will be antisemites. You can choose to read and follow Mein Kampf but a Muslim cannot do anything but believe in and follow the Koran, We have to accept that the Koran and Hadiths have much that contradicts itself and it rests on which interpretation individual Muslims choose to follow.
HP spends much of its time on outing Islamist antisemites so we can’t roll our eyes and shy away from saying this.
| 13 June 2009, 12:35 pm |
Well I didn’t get so far as to realise it was an analogy.
Do we really need to devote so much time dissecting the beliefs of nutters on the edge of society?
There are far bigger things going on – not least the recent “election” in Iran; the continuing vile oppression in Zimbabwe and Tibet.
| 13 June 2009, 12:49 pm |
Sorry, what happened in Iran?
| 13 June 2009, 1:12 pm |
Umm spectrum, there IS discrimination in Israel, both socialy and politicalt (through laws – which can be argued if they really are disscriminatory – and through state allowances). It isn’t to the extent of the Arab/Muslim states (duh!) but it is higher than in many Western states.
| 13 June 2009, 1:13 pm |
* both socially and politically
| 13 June 2009, 1:29 pm |
Their IS disriminstion in the UK, socially and politically but the root of that discrimination isn’t based on religion. I think I could forgive some Israelis being wary of Arabs when they have been trying to kill Jews for centuries.
| 13 June 2009, 1:30 pm |
oops “there”
| 13 June 2009, 1:39 pm |
So do Arab and Muslim comunities get less allowances from the govt (education,welfare,health, etc)? While at the same time mocked at for being poor unhealthy and uneducated by some peopel?
| 13 June 2009, 2:01 pm |
great post Seismic, as ever :-)
| 13 June 2009, 2:13 pm |
Well, from reading this, Ben White seems to be even more in line with the Richard Williamson kind of church than with the Rowan Williams one. What is it actually with the initials R. W., do they make one mad?
| 13 June 2009, 4:15 pm |
…evangelical Anglican Christian…Anglican Church
There’s a subtext to much of Seismic Schlock’s reports, but I just can’t quite put my finger on it…
| 13 June 2009, 4:39 pm |
Udo – Ben criticised the Anglican Church for worrying too much about Jewish-Christian relations in its dealings with Israel-Palestine. In this instance I’m actually defending the Anglican Church. So what’s the subtext exactly?
| 13 June 2009, 4:49 pm |
Ah yes the same Ben White is who a big chum of Toad of Toad Hall, unsurprisingly.
| 13 June 2009, 5:19 pm |
Excellent post Seismic, but in your penultimate paragraph where you wrote: “[a]lthough Bill can understand why some people might be vicious to Jews, he can’t understand why some people might arrest those plotting violent crimes against Jews“, did you not mean to write Ben?
| 13 June 2009, 5:37 pm |
Umm Isy, can you provide evidence to back up your contentions that:
1. Israeli laws are more discriminatory (notwithstanding your acceptance that this is debatable) than in many Western states;
2. That distribution of resources in Israel to minorities are more discriminatory than in many Western states;
3. And which Western states are you referring to?
For example in British Columbia, Canada, First Nation reserves have seen ongoing Provincial government policies allowing corporations to extract minerals and resources from, permit corporations to build roads through and erect hydroelectric towers on FN reserve land, sometimes without consultation (which is against Supreme Court of Canada rulings), let alone a right of refusal and sometimes without suitable compensation.
Is this more or less discriminatory than government distribution of resources to minorities in Israel?
| 13 June 2009, 6:14 pm |
Hi Seismic, Ben White seems to be filtering my replies now. Here is what I wrote:
Dear Mark,
for all your flannel, I don’t see why, if a frequenter of HP is a follower of DT, a frequenter of JSF is not a follower of ME.
Worse ethnic cleansing attended the births of Greece, Turkey, India, Pakistan, inter alia. Zionist Jews committed ethnic cleansing, sure. The same was threatened against them by Palestinian and other Arab Muslims and Christians. Israel does and continues to do bad things. But bad things are and have been threatened against Israeli or Palestinian Jews since before the her birth.
If pro-Palestinian Muslim and Christian nationalists are permitted a stall it is a double standard at best, illegal at worst, to deny pro-Jewish nationalists. Israel is a legal entity, founded on the principle of the League of and United Nations that Jews be permitted a national home, then state, in historical Palestine/the land of Israel. For all her faults, Israeli Arab Christians and Muslims have more rights in Israel than any Jew in the Arab Islamic world.
The West Bank is a problem, I admit, but the Palestinian and other Arab national movements and states have hardly been in a hurry to present Israel with terms in which she can withdraw entirely from those territories secure in the knowledge of a permanent peace agreement. The West Bank’s GDP compared very favourably with other Arab states before suicide bombings forced Israel to close the borders in the early nineties. It plummeted further, of course, when Arafat decided to wage a war. As for Gaza: all Hamas needs do for the sake of its people is to sign up to the principles of the Quartet. (Ben White’s Christian desire for its waging jihad until Israel’s demise, notwithstanding?).
Israel is engaged in a struggle with those who are either very reluctant to recognise or sign a permanent peace agreement with her, or those who would destroy her entirely. If this is unlike any other state or conflict, that is not Israel’s fault: those are the circumstances in which she was born and confronts today. As for “Gaza”, “Sri Lanka” also springs to mind.
In any case, I consider the UNISON ban discriminatory and, to that extent racist, against Jews, and, to that extent, antisemitic. So, Ben, I suppose, that is my defence of David Toube, although I am not so much interested in defending his thesis as his adducing the ban as a matter for concern. As to whether it constitutes “out of control antisemitism”, well, the organizers do seem ambivalent about the possibility of the threat of violence against TUFI, ambivalent as to protecting them against it, ambivalent as to whether it is a bad thing or not. Does that constitute a further defence of David Toube? Perhaps, although, as I said, I am more interested in defending my own theses than David Toube’s.
As for the rest, Ben,
please forgive my curiosity as to whether you were “Stan Bantu”. Just to clarify, Ben, were you? Perhaps my raising your father’s view was not strictly pertinent. In which case, I apologise. But I think my subsequent questions reasonable. So I shall paste them below, again:
how do you reconcile your professed Anglican evangelical Christianity with your “understanding” threats of violence towards trade unionist Jewish (or even non-Jewish) friends of Israel, and UNISON’s apathy towards if not collusion in them?
Or with your criticizing British Jews like David Toube for highlighting it?
| 13 June 2009, 6:31 pm |
He’s filtering your comments??? and to think Ben White was interested in ‘threats to our freedoms’ whilst overlooking our free speech!
good post by the way as well, it will be interesting if and how White and Elf respond.
| 13 June 2009, 6:33 pm |
Yes, James. He did post it in the end.
| 13 June 2009, 6:35 pm |
Oh good (am not James though) – I know BW has deleted comments before and ignored questions on his blog and the wider blogosphere.
| 13 June 2009, 6:40 pm |
OK I admit I haven’t done actual research and was basing on perception. Regarding the laws, there is the law of return, code of Kakal, law of the status of the International Zionist Federation (Histadrut Zionit Olamit) and laws regarding military service. I don’t want to get into them as they are a discussions of themselves. Regarding distribution of resources, the govt distributes less to Arab communities (not in relations to their numbers). This is discriminatory period. There is also discrimination in society. An Arab kid will have a harder time to get into a club, they aren’t being highered to jobs many times, sometimes they’re asked to show an ID when entering a public place even though thier bags were checked like everyone else.
Regarding your example, I don’t really understand what exactly is this policy. I don’t know what are the laws of extracting minerals & resources, permition of building roads and hydroelectric towers. Moreover, I don’t know anything about FN land (Are there considerably more minerals there than in other lands? IS the road building there for geographical reasons?). I admit when I said compaired to other contries, I was basing my statments on impresions and if you have knowledge that points to the contrary, then I’m sorry for mistaking. I just find it hard to belive that Western countries like USA or Britain distribute considerably less resources to minority comunities for no apparent reason (or even for some annoyingly BS justification). In any case there is discrimination and it’s a problem.
| 13 June 2009, 6:55 pm |
Ben White censor comments?
Of course he does, that’s the anti-Israeli method.
They can’t argue their way out of a wet paper bag, so have to resort to such tactics.
| 13 June 2009, 7:04 pm |
Isy and his ilk base their criticism of Israel not on research but on ‘perception’. Isn’t that convenient!
In fact, it’s a vicious circle: antisemites use propaganda to create a climate where Israel is perceived as the spawn of Satan. People like Isy then come along and claim, in all apparent innocence, that they are entitled to single out Israel for demonisation because there is a ‘perception’ that it deserves it. And so on ad infinitum, and ad nauseam. And it certainly is nauseating.
| 13 June 2009, 7:18 pm |
I see the comments have slimmed down from 14 to 10:
http://www.benwhite.org.uk/blog/?p=1128#comments
| 13 June 2009, 7:27 pm |
’sorry, Seismic re. “James”.
| 13 June 2009, 7:31 pm |
A. I ain’t a dude.
B. I ain’t antisemitic, I’m Jewish.
C. I single out Israel because I’m Israeli.
D. I admited it was a perception and APOLOGIESED. Do you want me to bend over too? If this disscrimination isn’t just in Israel, then there is a bigger problem. But I’m talking about ISrael because francly I’m not a moonbat protesot and I don’t care as much about the rights of Muslims in the UK (see C).
| 13 June 2009, 8:15 pm |
Ben White is now editing other people’s comments to highlight what he considers important:
http://www.benwhite.org.uk/blog/?p=1128#comment-58906
How competent a blogger Ben White has proved himself to be.
| 13 June 2009, 8:21 pm |
*Seemingly, Ben himself highlighted this comment in bright yellow:
http://www.benwhite.org.uk/blog/?p=1128#comment-58906
Levi, I can’t decide whether you are hilarious or merely stupid. My father was a very senior Zionist leader in a particular European country before WW2, and I know very well what Zionism is. I certainly don’t define it by what the craven appeasers at the Board of Deputies – or you – think it is.
Now these words are no longer highlighted in yellow, as of one minute ago.
| 13 June 2009, 8:24 pm |
Isy -Israel of course is not perfect and has its fair share of problems like everywhere else where there happen to be human beings, but it is totally inaccurate to presume that it is any more discriminatory than any other Western country, and having lived in quite a few, I would say less than many is more accurate.
As this thread relates to another topic, I do not wish to hog it by going off on another subject, interesting though it is. However, I will take you up on one point. You mention a supposed discrimination in the allocation of resources for healthcare. Given the structure of the healthcare system -and believe me, I know how it works -it is quite impossible for the government to have influence on this subject for better or for worse.
You know Isy, we Israelis indulge in quite a lot of very public and vocal self-criticism. Just because you don’t hear similar self-criticism coming from other countries certainly does not mean that problems do not exist. Try coming to the UK and getting a job in the public sector or the academic world with the word ‘Israel’ on your CV!
| 13 June 2009, 9:31 pm |
You have a point IsraaeliNurse. I actually asked to discuss this topic but my Email hasn’t been answered (BTW how do I create a guest post?). Regarding healthcare, I know the thing is a hell hole of bureaucracy and as a nurse you probably know this better than I do. The fact that you say that there is nothing the govt can do only makes matters worse. I know Israel isn’t some aparthied state, or even anywhere near it. I just find it hard to believe that, say in th US, African-American comunities get less for education (I think they do eventually, because of the policy of giving the most to the schools with the higher achievments). To tell you the truth I really don’t care that much about African-American rights in the US, or Muslim/Asian rights in Europe. What I do care about is Israel.
| 13 June 2009, 9:56 pm |
Isy,
You go here, http://wordpress.com/ and create a blog it takes five minutes.
| 13 June 2009, 9:58 pm |
Re Mark Elf, see http://www.paulbogdanor.com/antisemitism/elf.html
Shouldn’t he and BW be unlikely comrades?
| 13 June 2009, 10:16 pm |
Isy, FN is an abbreviation for for First Nations, which, along with Natives, is one of the ways in which Aboriginals as a collective are respectfully referred to in Canada. In the Province of British Columbia, First Nation Bands are legally entitled by the Supreme Court of Canada to claim and demonstrate what is called ‘Aboriginal Title’ which basically means full ownership of land and its resources.
Moreover, many First Nations are seeking to exercise powers of self-government on their land and title that Provincial and Federal governments are reluctant to accommodate. To date, since its joining into confederation with the Government of Canada in the 1870’s, the Government of BC can only count one fully ratified treaty and land claim settlement with a single First Nation out of about 120 or so First Nations in the province.
In the meantime, while Aboriginal bands go further and further into debt in the courts and in treaty negotiation meetings trying to establish and realize their claims to land and self-governance vis a vis Government prosecutors and negotiators who follow the instructions of their political masters, corporations are given a green light to extract and transport resources from land whose title and ownership are uncertain in the courts.
I was asking you whether to your mind this situation is more, or less discriminatory than the way Israel treats minority populations.
It’s a wonder why the International Left doesn’t hold Canada, as a Western state and more specifically and accurately, the Province of British Columbia, up to any level of vitriolic scrutiny whatsoever over this. All scrutiny of Western states is apparently reserved exclusively for the US, Israel and to a lesser extent the UK.
So the Government of British Columbia, despite of its continued deployment of facts on the ground like mining, fishing, salmon farming, lumber, gas, oil and hydroelectricity corporations to extract whatever non-renewable resource wealth they can from land and waters over which First Nations eventually may very well be legally able to assert exclusive title and with which they will have to generate most of their wealth for their communities’ well being get a pass.
Maybe, First Nations in Canada aren’t willing enough to pursue relentless violence against Canadians to attract attention from much, if not all of the International Left. Maybe far too many left wing British Columbians who live on land claimed by First Nations don’t savour the idea of a Palestinian Solidarity Campaign type of response to the situation.
| 13 June 2009, 10:18 pm |
Wait a minute, is Bill really a gay Catholic from Canada?
| 13 June 2009, 10:36 pm |
Isy -I obviously didn’t explain my point clearly enough. The point about the healthcare system is not that the government is powerless, but that the public healthcare system is not run by the government. Yes, there are a number of hospitals run by the ministry of health (as opposed to others either private or run by the Clalit) but I honestly can’t think why anyone could suggest that there is any sort of discrimination in those institutions.
The government allocates money to the various private healthcare companies (Kupot Holim) on the basis of the number of members holding insurance in that company -not on any ethnic basis. The government stipulates the ‘Basket of Services’ (sal sherutim) which the healthcare companies must provide for all their members, regardless of ethnicity.
Compared to the NHS here in the UK, the Israeli system is far superior, both in terms of actual medical care and accessibility.
I too care deeply about Israel, but whilst it is obviously important to try to constantly improve things, we must also not loose sight of all the many wonderful things we have acheived in only 61 years.
| 13 June 2009, 10:50 pm |
Dose allocate money equally to the healthcare companies without regard to nationality? (I’ve got to tell you, it isn’t like that in education – a school will get less money for each Arab student than for Jewish students). I think though there is huge discrimination against Etheopian Jews. I remeber reading in the newspaper once of a school in Petach-Tikva where the principle didn’t allow the Etheopian students to enter the school (he said it was because they bring down the school standard). And (oy vey I started a sentence with “And” ;D ) there’s also the religious Jews (like in Mea Shearim) who practicaly live in their own planet, where there is bigotry of other sects of JEwdaism on top of exteemisms.
| 13 June 2009, 10:50 pm |
Isy-
the statement “I ain’t antisemitic, I’m Jewish” is nonsense. Fine, you are not antisemitic. But there are plenty of antisemitic Jews. Ever heard of Atzmon? There are many more I can think of.
Seismic-
I tried to post a statement on Ben’s blog disagreeing with his moonbat theories. My post appeared, and was then removed within 90 seconds.
Israelinurse-
The Israeli healthcare system is good, but I have to say that my experience of the NHS has been also excellent over a number of years.
| 13 June 2009, 11:33 pm |
Me -I’m glad to hear it -mine has been awful! But I’m not basing my statement on personal experience -rather on measurable rates of things like cancer survival rates, hospital infections, teenage pregnancies, rates of sexually transmitted diseases, waiting times for tests and surgery and so forth.
Isy -you pay your health insurance to the company of your choice through your pay slip. For every shekel you pay the government also matches a certain amount. It doesn’t matter whether you are a Jew, an Arab, green or purple!
To be honest I know less about the standard education system because all my children were educated mostly in Kibbutz schools, but I can tell you that one of the reasons they got a decent education was because we always paid extra fees to suppliment the state funding. We didn’t have to -it was a lifestyle choice -and it came at the expense of other things.
Did you know that until very recently kibbutzniks were not entitled to unemployment benefits, despite paying National Insurance? Did you know that a kibbutznik cannot sue his own kibbutz as his employer in a work tribunal? Sure there are instances of discrimination and areas in which legislation must be improved, but on the whole I think we’re not doing too badly.
As for the residents of Mea Shearim; yes many do seem to live in a world of their own and they are sometimes hostile to the state, but they are still Israelis and whilst I may disagree with their views vehemently, it is still my right and my duty to defend them, take care of them, educate them, tend their sick etc. They are still my brothers, just like any other Israeli -Jew, Arab, Christian, Druze or Bedouin and I am still their keeper.
| 14 June 2009, 10:57 am |
Isy -one more point, and with this hopefully I will return to the theme of the original post (sincere apologies, Seismic).
Your comment regarding Mea Shearim captures what I find so problematic about the Left today.
If I had to distil the concept of Socialism into one word it would be ‘empathy’.
A socialist can empathise with others not belonging to his own political/social/ethnic/economic/gender/sexual orientation group and work to better their lot in life.
Empathy, however, is not conditional -otherwise it becomes sympathy -reminiscent of charitable Victorian notions along the lines of the ‘deserving poor’, but divorced from socialism.
In Israel and elsewhere we see that the Left has become sympathetic instead of empathic. Here in Britain the Left will demonstrate and fund raise for Palestinian causes, but not for the underclasses trapped in a cycle of poverty on its own council estates.
In Tel Aviv the left will happily demonstrate against the security fence, but cannot find a gram of empathy in its heart for the residents of Mea Shearim or the settlements of the West Bank- they have become ‘parasites’ or ‘barriers to peace’.
In my view this sympathetic Left is no more Socialist than the Right it so loudly criticises.
| 14 June 2009, 12:30 pm |
Israelinurse- one small point. It’s not only Clalit, is it? Don’t Maccabi & Meuchedet have hospitals?
| 14 June 2009, 3:55 pm |
OT
Sorry but this is too priceless to let pass by.
Jimmy “Peace Not Apartheid” Carter supports Israel retaining sovereignty over a Jewish settlement in the West Bank:
Former US President Jimmy Carter, generally known for being sympathetic to Israel’s rivals, made some surprising statements to settlers on Sunday, during a visit to Gush Etzion.
“I never imagined that Gush Etzion would be transferred to Palestinian hands,” Carter said following a meeting with local council leader Shaul Goldstein. He explained that the area is very close to the 1967 armistice line and will likely stay part of Israel forever.
| 14 June 2009, 8:00 pm |
Me -I can’t think of any off hand. I may be wrong, but then I’m a Clalit girl! Of course running a hospital is terribly expensive -much cheaper to buy services for your members than grapple with the overheads.
Lbnaz -aha! So even Carter can’t deny that Gush Etzion was bought with Jewish money!
“The Bill whom I have portrayed does not exist.”
I guessed this was an analogy at some point in the second or third paragraph. I expect the disbanding of Kach many years ago was a giveaway, but even so, had an equivalent group been substituted – that I can’t think of one speaks volumes – the existence of Bill-type characters must be pretty rare. For some reason genocidally anti-Muslim ideology just can’t garner the same support among do-gooders as genocidally antisemitic groups. Funny that.