Does Israel get a pass because of the mid 20th century holocaust?

[Jara sang]

Is that why so few Americans are willing to take a stand against the violence that Israel is perpetrating? Because the Jews were persecuted during WWII and because they are afraid of being labeled an anti-semite? I urge everyone to read Paolo Freire's Pedagogy of the Oppressed to put this into perspective. It defines how the oppressed becomes the oppressor. Read it.



http://www.marxists.org/subject/education/freire/pedago...

While the problem of humanization has always, from an axiological point of view, been humankind’s central problem, it now takes on the character of an inescapable concern.<1> Concern for humanization leads at once to the recognition of dehumanization, not only as an ontological possibility but as an historical reality And as an individual perceives the extent of dehumanization, he or she may ask if humanization is a viable possibility. Within history in concrete, objective contexts, both humanization and dehumanization are possibilities for a person as an uncompleted being conscious of their incompletion.

But while both humanization and dehumanization are real alternatives, only the first is the people’s vocation. This vocation is constantly negated, yet it is affirmed by that very negation. It is thwarted by injustice, exploitation, oppression, and the violence of the oppressors; it is affirmed by the yearning of the oppressed for freedom and justice, and by their struggle to recover their lost humanity.

Dehumanization, which marks not only those whose humanity has been stolen, but also (though in a different way) those who have stolen it, is a distortion of the vocation of becoming more fully human. This distortion occurs within history; but it is not an historical vocation. Indeed, to admit of dehumanization as an historical vocation would lead either to cynicism or total despair. The struggle for humanization, for the emancipation of labor, for the overcoming of alienation, for the affirmation of men and women as persons would be meaningless. This struggle is possible only because dehumanization, although a concrete historical fact, is not a given destiny but the result of an unjust order that engenders violence in the oppressors, which in turn dehumanizes the oppressed.

Because it is a distortion of being more fully human, sooner or later being less human leads the oppressed to struggle against those who made them so. In order for this struggle to have meaning, the oppressed must not in seeking to regain their humanity (which is a way to create it), become in turn oppressors of the oppressors, but rather restorers of the humanity of both.

[GAPeace]

1. From many people it does unfortunately

The people who've just heard the same victimized rhetoric too much.

[Sherman A1]

2. Agreed

[liberal N proud]

3. Good question,

I have always wondered, if there would be all the anti-semite charges if the holocaust had never been allowed to happen or had not included the jewish people.
I am sure the world would be a much safer place as there would not have been the driver to form modern Israel.

I wish we had that world.

[cynatnite]

4. It's because of religion...

While the holocaust may play a small part of that, the reason why most Americans support Israel is becaue gawd told them to...plus Israel plays a big part in bible prophecy. In their eyes, standing against Israel is standing against gawd.

[cali]

5. Israel doesn't get a pass

anywhere but in the U.S.

[Mandate My Ass]

6. They treat their neighbors abominably

and yet claim victim status no matter what.

If all their neighbors are so "hostile" perhaps they should ask themselves why that is. How long can you get away with saying it's everybody else who has the problem?

[cali]

18. What a rather

stupid and inane broad brush attack. Not mention, completely oblivious to a complex history. It's a standard dime a dozen comment that I've seen repeatedly here.

[barb162]

37. They treat their neighbors pretty well considering how many times

their neighbors have attacked them

[JackNewtown]

10. Great point nt

[bloom]

24. More about that...

"...We continue our coverage of the situation in the Middle East by examining how the U.S. press has been reporting on Lebanon, Israel and Gaza. Some have suggested that America is watching a different war than much of the world. The British journalist Julian Borger came to that conclusion after watching the news in Washington and London.

The British press, he said, overwhelmingly emphasized the civilian casualties in Lebanon. Meanwhile the U.S. media has focused on the situation in Israeli cities like Haifa. Meanwhile some journalists from the Middle East are now refusing to work with American news outlets.

Earlier this week, two producers working for Fox News in Amman Jordan resigned in protest. In their resignation letter, Serene Sabbagh and Jomana Karadsheh wrote "We can no longer work with a news organization that claims to be fair and balanced when you are so far from that."

They went on to write “Not only are you an instrument of the Bush White House, and Israeli propaganda, you are war mongers with no sense of decency, nor professionalism.”

http://www.democracynow.org/article.pl?sid=06/08/03/135...

[msmcghee]

36. NPR reports are completely unbiased IMO.

They bring in viewpoints from both sides - and question views that are questionable.

Non-NPR news is commercially supported. It's a commodity that is designed to make its viewers feel good with the reporting they see - so they'll tune in again and will see the commercials. So they must subtly spin their reports when possible to keep those viewers happy. FAUX is way beyond spin but that's the idea.

In a sense, state supported news in places that don't have many commercial outlets for news will parrot the view of those running the government - that's where they get their financing.

Anyone who gets their news in the US from anyplace but NPR is getting the news they want to hear - rather than an unbiased report. That includes Air America. Except maybe for the Christian Science Monitor IMO.

[oberliner]

7. 1. Original Posts Must Be About a Current Event

And contain non-inflammatory, substantial content.

(Edited to remove the "shouting")

[frylock]

8. get lost..

the post is not inflammatory and quite germaine to current events. If the post offends you, perhaps you should just avoid the board.

[stepnw1f]

9. Thank You

for saying it for me.

[cali]

25. Of course it;s inflamatory

and it's not even based on an accurate premise. As I said upthread, Israel only gets a pass from the US.

[JackNewtown]

11. This is a current event nt

Thanks for reporting thoughtcrime, though.

[Bretttido]

12. LMAO

[oberliner]

14. You seriously don't think this goes against the new rules?

If you wish to start a thread in the General Discussion forum about the Middle East situation involving Lebanon, Israel, and the surrounding countries, it must be based on a current news story.

Which current news story is this based on?

This is a post recommending and posting an excerpt from an over 30 year old text.

The comments preceding it are about Israel and violence generally, not a current news topic.

Saying that a post is in violation of the rules can hardly be equated to "reporting thoughtcrime", can it?

[Jara sang]

16. Didn't Michelle Malkin go to Oberlin?

Michelle? Is that you?

[oberliner]

23. Yes, she did.

Her name was Michelle Maglalang back then.

[Jara sang]

26. Did you go to Oberlin?

[oberliner]

30. I did indeed.

She was actually there the same time I was. Started out in the music conservatory but couldn't cut it so she switched to English.

She didn't become a right-winger until she started dating the future husband, who also went to Oberlin.

[Jara sang]

33. So you knew her?

Seriously, just wondering.

[cali]

27. Your style strikes me

as quite Michellish itself; full of ad hominem attacks.

[Jara sang]

Is this where the Israel lobby comes in to destroy my thread?

[jonnyblitz]

32. pretty much. he is busy jumping from thread to thread doing this.

[cali]

34. heh, yeah I'm really the Israel Lobby

that's why the title of the thread I started this morning is "Meanwhile Israel is bombing the shit out of Lebanon today".

Can you sink any lower?

[Wonk]

17. So hit alert and let the mods decide, if you want it gone that badly. nt

[Ariana Celeste]

20. So alert a mod

I seem to remember that being somewhere in the rules.

[malaise]

21. Stop shouting please n/t

[jonnyblitz]

28. I see you are policing the threads. nt

[EST]

13. Yes, that's a big part of it, but the bigger, much bigger

portion of it is abject greed-for both power and money.
The whole thrust of this insanity is not about any of the BS that gets peddled to the simps, it's about who is gonna' be boss hog of the world. The seven billion world inhabitants are going to wind up 97% eating rats and living in mud huts, while 3% are kings.
The net result, I fear, will be world wide revolution, armed revolution, including right here.

There comes a time, there always does, when a people have to overthrow their government.

[breakaleg]

15. Yes. I think the main reason for not standing up against such

atrocities is fear of being labled and anti-semite, and guilt over what Jews have been put through thus far. Society feels they have to make up for the past and that makes Israel untouchable.

And if you look here, that is what happens any time someone points out the awful things Israel is doing to the Palestinians and now the Lebanese.

And the defence for this awful behavior is always the same - Palestinians or Hezbollah don't recognize Israel's right to exist.

In my mind this arguement falls down when you look at the size of the armies at their disposal. Israel is by far the strongest power in the region, and can easily crush any other country should they get into a full blown war. And they can't defend themselves against a bunch of threats from Hezbollah, knowing they can't back up those threats with firepower? It's rediculous.

[malaise]

19. Not from me anymore

I'm sympathizing with the Lebanese and Palestinians.

[drduffy]

22. Dershowitz, et. al., pushed

the meme that if you criticized Israel (government or whatever) that you were anti-semitic. And the holocaust was used to effect.

I, for one, feel free to criticize Israel's government as much as I wish. And to question many of the presuppositions that get thrown around. Also, I don't know that you have to get mired into the philosophy above to explain the behavior of the oppressed/oppressors. Psychology/sociology are less obtuse.

[jonnyblitz]

31. self-delete responded to wrong post. nt

[rock]

29. No, but ...

it does get the benefit of the doubt.

[elehhhhna]

35. Sure, and that's why we're going to let all previously-oppressed

peoples open fire on whomever they please with impugnity. Sounds fair, right?

[msmcghee]

38. Some few here hate Israel because it is Jewish.

Those are anti-Semites. Most here hate Israel because they hate the RW of our government - and our RW have almost always supported Israel - except for the David Duke / Pat Buchanon faction.

Fortunately most thinking Democrats and liberals don't share this self-destructive view and would rather have peace in the world than one more way to oppose the neo-cons.

They are being played by ME dictators and despots like puppets on a string.

[undergroundrailroad]

39. Locking per I/P Guidelines

Not based on a recent article or op-ed.

For future reference, please review the posting guidelines when starting a new thread in the Israeli/Palestinian Forum.

If you have any further questions, please contact myself or Lithos.

Thank you.

Undergroundrailroad
DU Moderator
Israeli/Palestinian Forum