These cases are undeniably sad. Ignorant. Israel's merciless annihilation of Gazans and now, just getting started, citizens of the West Bank, has nothing to do with American Jews - or more broadly, Jews living in America - living their values of Torah, service to God, and Chesed. This last translates as love and kindness between people, as the practice of bestowing tender mercies.
What Israel truly needs to recognize, however, is that their annihilation of Palestinians (I realize there are people among Dumisani's organization who reject that demonym. I beg your pardon, for I can think of no better word) contributes to the peoples of the world taking a hardened stance against Jews in general.
It is a tragic fact of our time - and indeed, of any epoch in human history - that too many of us refuse to see the differences between one group of people and another. The very broadest of similarities is used to justify labeling all who share those similarities as either extoled or evil. Black Lives Matter does this with every breath. So does the LGBTQ movement, which is quite separate from LGBTQ people.
Many of us here who write on Free Black Thought recognize the absurdities promulgated by BLM and the Alphabet Movement. Many of us here understand that the Social Justice Movement is in reality a Social Retribution Movement. We react with righteous condemnation when BLM and the Alphabets dare to group all White heterosexual males as monolithic and hopelessly dangerous. We should do the same when Israelis do this to Palestinians.
Israel does itself no favors by its historical treatment of Palestinians and its current slaughter of tens of thousands of them. Israel's actions toward Palestinians no more represents the beautiful, unassailable, loving, spiritually potent tenants of Judaism then BLM represents Black Americans or the LGBTQ movement represents transexuals.
And we... WE... have a moral obligation to call out our dear Israeli friends when they stray from the tender mercies of HaShem... Elohim... God. Friends are unafraid to hold Friends to moral standards. Christians are unafraid to hold Christians to moral standards.
Reject all forms of ethnic and cultural hatred. If these are our values, we must be eternal and united and persistent in championing them.
These folks are genuine heroes. To them: THANK YOU for speaking up, for your courage and integrity. The issue has nothing to do with any legitimate criticisms of Israeli policy, it has to do with those who seek to annihilate the one Jewish state in the world and the Jews who live in it, as well as the Jews in the diaspora (most of whom support the existence of the state, if not some particular government or policies). Weird that in the 21st century someone can think that "Jewish" refers only to a religion. Judaism is the religion of the Jewish people. Not all Jewish people observe Judaism (how many non-religious Jews do you know? Probably loads.) Not all who practice Judaism are (originally) ethnically Jewish people. But there is the religion and there are the people. Acknowledge that, then acknowledge the people's right to self-determination in their ancestral homeland, to which the people are collectively indigenous. That leaves loads of room for Palestinians in any number of arrangements, including two states, if the Palestinians should ever choose peace rather than annihilating the Jews and their state.
“Weird that in the 21st century someone can think that "Jewish" refers only to a religion. Judaism is the religion of the Jewish people”
Why is that weird?
“Jewish” refers to people who belong to the religion of Judaism. The people who belong to a religion are “a people”. Christians are “a people”. As are Scientologists. They are a “religious people”.
“Not all Jewish people observe Judaism (how many non-religious Jews do you know? Probably loads.)”
If someone believes that they belong to an imaginary conceptual community connected by traditions and/or birth, that is religious. I don’t know any non religious Jews. I know Jews who call themselves non religious and I know Jews who don’t like Moses, but I don’t know of any Jews who aren’t loyal to belonging to a mythical Jewish tribe or nation or race. If they weren’t , they wouldn’t identify as Jewish. Just as ex Mormons don’t identify still as Mormon.
Judaism, because of its religious mythology that racializes members (e.g. the seed of Abraham; Israel is the home of the people of descendants of Abraham) it seems to have a greater “stickiness” for members who reject other mythological elements. But we still find Christians who call themselves Christians and consider themselves part of the Christian tribe even though they they don’t believe primary myths, such as Jesus being a god or his sacrifice being cosmically important to human salvation. In the sense they still identity as Christian, they still believe they belong to “the body of Christ.”
“Not all who practice Judaism are (originally) ethnically Jewish people.”
There are no “ethnically Jewish people”, just as there are no “ethnically Christian people”. The term ethnicity is just used as a euphemism for race. It has no meaning that it provides above other more specific terms like culture or race or nationality. It’s a word for racial tribalists to be racially tribal without referring to the term race.
“Acknowledge that, then acknowledge the people's right to self-determination in their ancestral homeland, to which the people are collectively indigenous.”
This is a pretty odious sentiment. People who never set foot on the land of the Levant before the 20th century are not “indigenous”. Some Jews had ruled that land for over a thousand years ago. And ancient Jews acquired that land through conquest--genocidal conquest. The notion that they became indigenous after genocidal conquest is obscene. I am not an indigenous American because early settlers of America conquered the land of the US. And my descendants, either biological or through joining a religion I was part of, 3000 years later would not have any “right” to “self determination” and imperialism over America if the US had lost its hegemony over the land over 1000 years before to various other imperialistic nations.
If a person believes Jews have a right to an “ancestral homeland” in the Levant that person has a religious belief--and an irrational one. The Jews historically had no homeland. Moses allegedly wanted one for his “people”, like Jim Jones, and decided that he was going to murder innocent people to get it and claimed a god had promised it to an ancestor of his and sanctioned it. If a Jew today believes that Jews today have a right to the land because of something related to that story they believe one of the foundational myths of Judaism. Whether they don’t believe in Jehovah is not essential for their religiosity. If they believe in a “right to land” premised on an ancient myth or conquest, they are religious.
But whether Jews are a religion or just a tribe or a nation, they aren’t a race, like Scientologists are not a race and Jains are not a race and Americans are not a race. Whether being “Jewish” refers only to religion is not relevant ultimately. Criticizing ideology or any governments some Jews have established is not racist, aka “anti semetic”. It’s as okay as criticizing the ideology of Scientology or criticizing the government of any other modern nation state, or criticizing the colony of Jim Jones.
We obviously live in very different universes. You use words like "race" and "religion" in quite interesting, but not particularly standard ways. As long as you apply your reasoning with the same standards to the Palestinians then we probably can agree on a lot. If all religions are myths, fine; I hope you apply that equally to Christianity and Islam. All "peoplehood," all "races" are social constructs in various ways; sure. But peoplehood is constructed over time, and involves identifying with sometimes long histories; most Jews today identify with ancient Jews (and further back Israelites), which makes them belong to the same "people." It's not individuals that are indigenous, it is "peoples." And you'd think that some 1300 years of sovereignty and (relative) autonomy in antiquity would be as good a ground of indigeneity as you can get, not least because pretty much all peoples ended up where they are on earth due to imperialism and conquest and migration. And after 1300 years of sovereignty-autonomy, even after the Roman conquest there were continuous Jewish populations in the Land of Israel to the modern day, and even WITH that conquest and the expulsions-diaspora Jews collectively never gave up their attachment to and claim to that land, and constantly returned to it in smaller or greater numbers. That alone doesn't give them the "right" to the land in the sense of "right to conquer it and expel others" -- but given that the vast majority returned legally (by the laws in place at the time), and as refugees, and in fact purchased most of the land they acquired, that's what gave them the right to be there as individuals -- and then of course the subsequent wars started by the Arabs produced all sorts of other consequences we could debate about, but once the population was in place then if any peoples have any sort of collective right to self-determination in their ancestral homelands, Jews certainly did. (Again if you are against all forms of ethnic identity, all forms of nationalism, all forms of religion, great; we could agree on a lot. But if you are uniquely against Jewish claims while supporting other people's and other religions' claims (such as the Palestinians), then we disagree on a lot.)
“ You use words like "race" and "religion" in quite interesting, but not particularly standard ways.”
Reaaaly? I consider race to refer to a broad biological based lineage that all people of a particular designated group share. That is not standard? Yes in what universe do you live?
As for religion, its meaning is more contentious, but when I say something is religious or a religion it has something to do with creating meaning and communities through shared rituals, traditions, loyalties, revered people and objects and interpretive frameworks for events. If you surveyed religious scholarly literature about definitions, something like that what would be among them.
“ As long as you apply your reasoning with the same standards to the Palestinians then we probably can agree on a lot. If all religions are myths, fine; I hope you apply that equally to Christianity and Islam. ”
All religions include what I’d consider myths. Including the religious foundation of science, which has faith in the idea that the world we observe has causation and isn’t simply a slide show being generated by a wizard. It’s something I have faith in myself, and the vast majority of humans, given not believing it would probably lead to insanity. I think it is a reasonable faith given the alternative.
Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Judaism— they all contain a lot of what Id consider unreasonable faith. I certainly do not think Judaism is any more mythically based than Islam, Christianity or Buddhism.
“ All "peoplehood," all "races" are social constructs in various ways; sure”
Race is not a social construct, albeit particular folk races, like black and white are arguably social constructs. The empirical reality of biological lineages that some people are part of and others are not, is not a social construct. That is reality. How to delineate the lineages is largely a social construct, and any judgements people have about individuals in those lineages are certainly social constructs, but not the lineages themselves.
All Jews do not belong to a shared biological lineage, thus they are not a race. It is a simple concept to understand.
“ But peoplehood is constructed over time, and involves identifying with sometimes long histories; most Jews today identify with ancient Jews (and further back Israelites), which makes them belong to the same "people." It's not individuals that are indigenous, it is "peoples." ”
This is a religious idea. Which is fine. It’s not serving anymore value than the concept of a tribe though. It’s just more syllables.
“ And you'd think that some 1300 years of sovereignty and (relative) autonomy in antiquity would be as good a ground of indigeneity as you can get, not least because pretty much all peoples ended up where they are on earth due to imperialism and conquest and migration. ”
No amount of years will make a imperialistic tribe indigenous to the land they conquered. “Migration” isn’t conquest. Australian aboriginals didn’t conquer the land in Australia that they settled. If they did, then calling them aboriginals is a misnomer. There will be never a time when United States citizens are indigenous to America. Not 1000 years, not 10000 years. There will never be a time when Jews are indigenous to the Levant. I don’t believe in that myth. It is wrong.
“ Jews collectively never gave up their attachment to and claim to that land, and constantly returned to it in smaller or greater numbers. ”
They *should* give it up. That would be the honorable thing to do, rather than stay attached to land that was originally acquired by their tribal ancestors through murder and madness. The most honorable thing to do would be to leave the Jewish tribe altogether. And if they don’t have the courage to do that, they should try to convince their tribe to give up its attachment to fairy tales about ruling a promised land that was in ancient history acquired through evil.
“ once the population was in place then if any peoples have any sort of collective right to self-determination in their ancestral homelands, Jews certainly did. ”
Jews have no more right to Israel than the Palestinians currently there and the Palestinians who were forcefully removed . The notion that I’d have more of a right to “self determination “ in Israel if I converted to Judaism today and then moved there than Palestinians whose biological ancestors were living there for the past few hundred years is grotesque. And that is a law in Israel today—a law explicitly states that Jews have more rights than non Jews in Israel. It’s disgusting. All Israelis should have equal rights regardless of whether they belong to some ancient tribe that once murdered all the pregnant women in the land thousands of years ago and worshiped a psychotic deity. It’s an abomination.
That people actually expect me, who would have been likely murdered by that tribe had I voiced my opinion of the imaginary god they worshipped at the time it conducted its conquests, to respect that tribe has a privileged right to rule the land of the Levant today which some in the tribe recently re conquered and expelled many innocent people is absolutely batshit bonkers.
“ Again if you are against all forms of ethnic identity, all forms of nationalism, all forms of religion, great; we could agree on a lot. But if you are uniquely against Jewish claims while supporting other people's and other religions' claims (such as the Palestinians), then we disagree on a lot.)”
I am against all forms of ethnic identity (aka racial tribalism). I am not against all forms of nationalism or all forms of religion. Some nations are better than others and some religion is better. A nation that doesn’t privilege Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, or Communism, et al. are at an advantage of being a nation worthy of greater respect. Don’t assume that because I think Israel in its current theocratic Jewish Supremacist condition is degenerate that I think it would be better if Hamas took over. I’d rather live in Israel than Pakistan or Saudi Arabia. Israel is less bad than Iran.
But I don’t think the US should be subsidizing the military of Israel, Saudi Arabia, or any other wealthy country —- It’s corrupt. And it puts American citizens in danger. It’s driven by the financial and or ideological interests of a minority of people with substantial power. And fueled by bamboozled useful-idiots with much less power.
I think the point was to express solidarity with the Israeli government’s Jewish Supremacist laws and to irrationally suggest that people who criticize the government of Israel or Zionism are racist.
It's with more than great relief that I read Free Black Thought. It increases my resolve than we can unite on values of the worth of each individual without regard to a person's ascriptive status. People who wish to divide us along race lines do so only for their own power.
Anti-semitism is not okay...but if you don't hate Israel in its current form, you're not paying attention. This piece is just more nonsense conflating anti-Zionism with anti-semitism.
In the public discussion about “Israel & the Jews”there is an enormous lack of nuance in general. Nuance of any kind is typically denounced by all the powerful factions as evidence of some form of racial bigotry toward some group of people.
If someone expresses criticism of Israel, there will be many people who will be enthusiastic to slander them as “anti Semitic”. If someone criticizes Palestinian activists, there will be people who slander that person as being racist against Arabs or apologists for racial genocide.
One of the most overlooked and under-appreciated elements of the discussion is that Jews and Muslims are not racial groups. They are religious tribes. People belong to religious tribes voluntarily. There is nothing wrong with criticizing religious tribes. This can be readily observed by the fact that no one cares but Scientologists when people criticize Scientology or Scientologists.
If someone criticizes Israel or Judaism, it doesn’t logically follow that they are racist toward Hebrews or Europeans or any other genetic lineage. If someone criticizes Palestine or Muslims it doesn’t follow that they are racist toward Arabs or any other genetic lineage. A person can be virulently against policies of Israel and not be “anti semitic.” Unless there is substantial evidence that person is actually racist toward people of “semite” racial origin, because the term has the connotation of racism, the term is simply slander. It isn’t sufficient that *other* people who are against Israeli policies or it’s government are in fact racist toward people of Hebrew ancestry. That is a logical fallacy.
Likewise, unless there is substantial evidence that someone is actually racist toward people of Arab ancestry, suggesting a person is “racist toward Muslims” because a person has critical views of the Hamas, is simply slander.
Muslims are not a race. Jews are not a race. Christians are not a race. Scientologists are not a race. And there is no fundamental sin to criticize religions or members of religious tribes. Scientology should be criticized, and Scientologists should be encouraged to abandon their religious tribe. Other religions are not exempt from that possibility. If a person thinks a particular religion is, they need to argue why, not simply rest on the assumption that they can slander people with irrational accusations of racism.
I’d like to point out that although the authors did seem to get the memo from Chappelle that cautioned people from using the two words “the” and “Jews” in sequence, it probably took me quoting their title before realizing that they had forgot the memo while writing their original title. As the title of the post is no longer “When Black People Defend Israel & the Jews”, which I received in my email box and I can provide proof for anyone, but rather “When Black People Defend Israel & Jews”. I just wanted to point that out since my comment includes “the Jews” because I was quoting the original title of the post, not because I was channeling the spirit of Ye.
We should take a moment of silence to meditate on the irony of a post signaling it’s pious fealty to Zionists and the government of Israel using the phrase “the Jews” in the title. An innocent slip or evidence of secret anti-semitism????????
It is quite curious that such an adjustment was made. Seems like whoever really wanted the article written requested the edit. Or...those who published it could explain why “the” was such a problem that it needed to be removed. 🤔
Moreover, IF folk wanna look at “Jew” as a race, they would have been an Alekbulani (i.e. African) people. Prior to the Suez Canal, Israel was solidly on the continent called Africa.
These cases are undeniably sad. Ignorant. Israel's merciless annihilation of Gazans and now, just getting started, citizens of the West Bank, has nothing to do with American Jews - or more broadly, Jews living in America - living their values of Torah, service to God, and Chesed. This last translates as love and kindness between people, as the practice of bestowing tender mercies.
What Israel truly needs to recognize, however, is that their annihilation of Palestinians (I realize there are people among Dumisani's organization who reject that demonym. I beg your pardon, for I can think of no better word) contributes to the peoples of the world taking a hardened stance against Jews in general.
It is a tragic fact of our time - and indeed, of any epoch in human history - that too many of us refuse to see the differences between one group of people and another. The very broadest of similarities is used to justify labeling all who share those similarities as either extoled or evil. Black Lives Matter does this with every breath. So does the LGBTQ movement, which is quite separate from LGBTQ people.
Many of us here who write on Free Black Thought recognize the absurdities promulgated by BLM and the Alphabet Movement. Many of us here understand that the Social Justice Movement is in reality a Social Retribution Movement. We react with righteous condemnation when BLM and the Alphabets dare to group all White heterosexual males as monolithic and hopelessly dangerous. We should do the same when Israelis do this to Palestinians.
Israel does itself no favors by its historical treatment of Palestinians and its current slaughter of tens of thousands of them. Israel's actions toward Palestinians no more represents the beautiful, unassailable, loving, spiritually potent tenants of Judaism then BLM represents Black Americans or the LGBTQ movement represents transexuals.
And we... WE... have a moral obligation to call out our dear Israeli friends when they stray from the tender mercies of HaShem... Elohim... God. Friends are unafraid to hold Friends to moral standards. Christians are unafraid to hold Christians to moral standards.
Reject all forms of ethnic and cultural hatred. If these are our values, we must be eternal and united and persistent in championing them.
No room for my versions of free black thought in the agenda for colonised spirit and mind as the body tithes
These folks are genuine heroes. To them: THANK YOU for speaking up, for your courage and integrity. The issue has nothing to do with any legitimate criticisms of Israeli policy, it has to do with those who seek to annihilate the one Jewish state in the world and the Jews who live in it, as well as the Jews in the diaspora (most of whom support the existence of the state, if not some particular government or policies). Weird that in the 21st century someone can think that "Jewish" refers only to a religion. Judaism is the religion of the Jewish people. Not all Jewish people observe Judaism (how many non-religious Jews do you know? Probably loads.) Not all who practice Judaism are (originally) ethnically Jewish people. But there is the religion and there are the people. Acknowledge that, then acknowledge the people's right to self-determination in their ancestral homeland, to which the people are collectively indigenous. That leaves loads of room for Palestinians in any number of arrangements, including two states, if the Palestinians should ever choose peace rather than annihilating the Jews and their state.
“Weird that in the 21st century someone can think that "Jewish" refers only to a religion. Judaism is the religion of the Jewish people”
Why is that weird?
“Jewish” refers to people who belong to the religion of Judaism. The people who belong to a religion are “a people”. Christians are “a people”. As are Scientologists. They are a “religious people”.
“Not all Jewish people observe Judaism (how many non-religious Jews do you know? Probably loads.)”
If someone believes that they belong to an imaginary conceptual community connected by traditions and/or birth, that is religious. I don’t know any non religious Jews. I know Jews who call themselves non religious and I know Jews who don’t like Moses, but I don’t know of any Jews who aren’t loyal to belonging to a mythical Jewish tribe or nation or race. If they weren’t , they wouldn’t identify as Jewish. Just as ex Mormons don’t identify still as Mormon.
Judaism, because of its religious mythology that racializes members (e.g. the seed of Abraham; Israel is the home of the people of descendants of Abraham) it seems to have a greater “stickiness” for members who reject other mythological elements. But we still find Christians who call themselves Christians and consider themselves part of the Christian tribe even though they they don’t believe primary myths, such as Jesus being a god or his sacrifice being cosmically important to human salvation. In the sense they still identity as Christian, they still believe they belong to “the body of Christ.”
“Not all who practice Judaism are (originally) ethnically Jewish people.”
There are no “ethnically Jewish people”, just as there are no “ethnically Christian people”. The term ethnicity is just used as a euphemism for race. It has no meaning that it provides above other more specific terms like culture or race or nationality. It’s a word for racial tribalists to be racially tribal without referring to the term race.
“Acknowledge that, then acknowledge the people's right to self-determination in their ancestral homeland, to which the people are collectively indigenous.”
This is a pretty odious sentiment. People who never set foot on the land of the Levant before the 20th century are not “indigenous”. Some Jews had ruled that land for over a thousand years ago. And ancient Jews acquired that land through conquest--genocidal conquest. The notion that they became indigenous after genocidal conquest is obscene. I am not an indigenous American because early settlers of America conquered the land of the US. And my descendants, either biological or through joining a religion I was part of, 3000 years later would not have any “right” to “self determination” and imperialism over America if the US had lost its hegemony over the land over 1000 years before to various other imperialistic nations.
If a person believes Jews have a right to an “ancestral homeland” in the Levant that person has a religious belief--and an irrational one. The Jews historically had no homeland. Moses allegedly wanted one for his “people”, like Jim Jones, and decided that he was going to murder innocent people to get it and claimed a god had promised it to an ancestor of his and sanctioned it. If a Jew today believes that Jews today have a right to the land because of something related to that story they believe one of the foundational myths of Judaism. Whether they don’t believe in Jehovah is not essential for their religiosity. If they believe in a “right to land” premised on an ancient myth or conquest, they are religious.
But whether Jews are a religion or just a tribe or a nation, they aren’t a race, like Scientologists are not a race and Jains are not a race and Americans are not a race. Whether being “Jewish” refers only to religion is not relevant ultimately. Criticizing ideology or any governments some Jews have established is not racist, aka “anti semetic”. It’s as okay as criticizing the ideology of Scientology or criticizing the government of any other modern nation state, or criticizing the colony of Jim Jones.
We obviously live in very different universes. You use words like "race" and "religion" in quite interesting, but not particularly standard ways. As long as you apply your reasoning with the same standards to the Palestinians then we probably can agree on a lot. If all religions are myths, fine; I hope you apply that equally to Christianity and Islam. All "peoplehood," all "races" are social constructs in various ways; sure. But peoplehood is constructed over time, and involves identifying with sometimes long histories; most Jews today identify with ancient Jews (and further back Israelites), which makes them belong to the same "people." It's not individuals that are indigenous, it is "peoples." And you'd think that some 1300 years of sovereignty and (relative) autonomy in antiquity would be as good a ground of indigeneity as you can get, not least because pretty much all peoples ended up where they are on earth due to imperialism and conquest and migration. And after 1300 years of sovereignty-autonomy, even after the Roman conquest there were continuous Jewish populations in the Land of Israel to the modern day, and even WITH that conquest and the expulsions-diaspora Jews collectively never gave up their attachment to and claim to that land, and constantly returned to it in smaller or greater numbers. That alone doesn't give them the "right" to the land in the sense of "right to conquer it and expel others" -- but given that the vast majority returned legally (by the laws in place at the time), and as refugees, and in fact purchased most of the land they acquired, that's what gave them the right to be there as individuals -- and then of course the subsequent wars started by the Arabs produced all sorts of other consequences we could debate about, but once the population was in place then if any peoples have any sort of collective right to self-determination in their ancestral homelands, Jews certainly did. (Again if you are against all forms of ethnic identity, all forms of nationalism, all forms of religion, great; we could agree on a lot. But if you are uniquely against Jewish claims while supporting other people's and other religions' claims (such as the Palestinians), then we disagree on a lot.)
“ You use words like "race" and "religion" in quite interesting, but not particularly standard ways.”
Reaaaly? I consider race to refer to a broad biological based lineage that all people of a particular designated group share. That is not standard? Yes in what universe do you live?
As for religion, its meaning is more contentious, but when I say something is religious or a religion it has something to do with creating meaning and communities through shared rituals, traditions, loyalties, revered people and objects and interpretive frameworks for events. If you surveyed religious scholarly literature about definitions, something like that what would be among them.
“ As long as you apply your reasoning with the same standards to the Palestinians then we probably can agree on a lot. If all religions are myths, fine; I hope you apply that equally to Christianity and Islam. ”
All religions include what I’d consider myths. Including the religious foundation of science, which has faith in the idea that the world we observe has causation and isn’t simply a slide show being generated by a wizard. It’s something I have faith in myself, and the vast majority of humans, given not believing it would probably lead to insanity. I think it is a reasonable faith given the alternative.
Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Judaism— they all contain a lot of what Id consider unreasonable faith. I certainly do not think Judaism is any more mythically based than Islam, Christianity or Buddhism.
“ All "peoplehood," all "races" are social constructs in various ways; sure”
Race is not a social construct, albeit particular folk races, like black and white are arguably social constructs. The empirical reality of biological lineages that some people are part of and others are not, is not a social construct. That is reality. How to delineate the lineages is largely a social construct, and any judgements people have about individuals in those lineages are certainly social constructs, but not the lineages themselves.
All Jews do not belong to a shared biological lineage, thus they are not a race. It is a simple concept to understand.
“ But peoplehood is constructed over time, and involves identifying with sometimes long histories; most Jews today identify with ancient Jews (and further back Israelites), which makes them belong to the same "people." It's not individuals that are indigenous, it is "peoples." ”
This is a religious idea. Which is fine. It’s not serving anymore value than the concept of a tribe though. It’s just more syllables.
“ And you'd think that some 1300 years of sovereignty and (relative) autonomy in antiquity would be as good a ground of indigeneity as you can get, not least because pretty much all peoples ended up where they are on earth due to imperialism and conquest and migration. ”
No amount of years will make a imperialistic tribe indigenous to the land they conquered. “Migration” isn’t conquest. Australian aboriginals didn’t conquer the land in Australia that they settled. If they did, then calling them aboriginals is a misnomer. There will be never a time when United States citizens are indigenous to America. Not 1000 years, not 10000 years. There will never be a time when Jews are indigenous to the Levant. I don’t believe in that myth. It is wrong.
“ Jews collectively never gave up their attachment to and claim to that land, and constantly returned to it in smaller or greater numbers. ”
They *should* give it up. That would be the honorable thing to do, rather than stay attached to land that was originally acquired by their tribal ancestors through murder and madness. The most honorable thing to do would be to leave the Jewish tribe altogether. And if they don’t have the courage to do that, they should try to convince their tribe to give up its attachment to fairy tales about ruling a promised land that was in ancient history acquired through evil.
“ once the population was in place then if any peoples have any sort of collective right to self-determination in their ancestral homelands, Jews certainly did. ”
Jews have no more right to Israel than the Palestinians currently there and the Palestinians who were forcefully removed . The notion that I’d have more of a right to “self determination “ in Israel if I converted to Judaism today and then moved there than Palestinians whose biological ancestors were living there for the past few hundred years is grotesque. And that is a law in Israel today—a law explicitly states that Jews have more rights than non Jews in Israel. It’s disgusting. All Israelis should have equal rights regardless of whether they belong to some ancient tribe that once murdered all the pregnant women in the land thousands of years ago and worshiped a psychotic deity. It’s an abomination.
That people actually expect me, who would have been likely murdered by that tribe had I voiced my opinion of the imaginary god they worshipped at the time it conducted its conquests, to respect that tribe has a privileged right to rule the land of the Levant today which some in the tribe recently re conquered and expelled many innocent people is absolutely batshit bonkers.
“ Again if you are against all forms of ethnic identity, all forms of nationalism, all forms of religion, great; we could agree on a lot. But if you are uniquely against Jewish claims while supporting other people's and other religions' claims (such as the Palestinians), then we disagree on a lot.)”
I am against all forms of ethnic identity (aka racial tribalism). I am not against all forms of nationalism or all forms of religion. Some nations are better than others and some religion is better. A nation that doesn’t privilege Judaism, Christianity, Islam, Buddhism, Hinduism, or Communism, et al. are at an advantage of being a nation worthy of greater respect. Don’t assume that because I think Israel in its current theocratic Jewish Supremacist condition is degenerate that I think it would be better if Hamas took over. I’d rather live in Israel than Pakistan or Saudi Arabia. Israel is less bad than Iran.
But I don’t think the US should be subsidizing the military of Israel, Saudi Arabia, or any other wealthy country —- It’s corrupt. And it puts American citizens in danger. It’s driven by the financial and or ideological interests of a minority of people with substantial power. And fueled by bamboozled useful-idiots with much less power.
This is an article the seems to have forgotten to make a point.
I think the point was to express solidarity with the Israeli government’s Jewish Supremacist laws and to irrationally suggest that people who criticize the government of Israel or Zionism are racist.
It's with more than great relief that I read Free Black Thought. It increases my resolve than we can unite on values of the worth of each individual without regard to a person's ascriptive status. People who wish to divide us along race lines do so only for their own power.
Anti-semitism is not okay...but if you don't hate Israel in its current form, you're not paying attention. This piece is just more nonsense conflating anti-Zionism with anti-semitism.
In the public discussion about “Israel & the Jews”there is an enormous lack of nuance in general. Nuance of any kind is typically denounced by all the powerful factions as evidence of some form of racial bigotry toward some group of people.
If someone expresses criticism of Israel, there will be many people who will be enthusiastic to slander them as “anti Semitic”. If someone criticizes Palestinian activists, there will be people who slander that person as being racist against Arabs or apologists for racial genocide.
One of the most overlooked and under-appreciated elements of the discussion is that Jews and Muslims are not racial groups. They are religious tribes. People belong to religious tribes voluntarily. There is nothing wrong with criticizing religious tribes. This can be readily observed by the fact that no one cares but Scientologists when people criticize Scientology or Scientologists.
If someone criticizes Israel or Judaism, it doesn’t logically follow that they are racist toward Hebrews or Europeans or any other genetic lineage. If someone criticizes Palestine or Muslims it doesn’t follow that they are racist toward Arabs or any other genetic lineage. A person can be virulently against policies of Israel and not be “anti semitic.” Unless there is substantial evidence that person is actually racist toward people of “semite” racial origin, because the term has the connotation of racism, the term is simply slander. It isn’t sufficient that *other* people who are against Israeli policies or it’s government are in fact racist toward people of Hebrew ancestry. That is a logical fallacy.
Likewise, unless there is substantial evidence that someone is actually racist toward people of Arab ancestry, suggesting a person is “racist toward Muslims” because a person has critical views of the Hamas, is simply slander.
Muslims are not a race. Jews are not a race. Christians are not a race. Scientologists are not a race. And there is no fundamental sin to criticize religions or members of religious tribes. Scientology should be criticized, and Scientologists should be encouraged to abandon their religious tribe. Other religions are not exempt from that possibility. If a person thinks a particular religion is, they need to argue why, not simply rest on the assumption that they can slander people with irrational accusations of racism.
A lot of people need to get the memo.
I’d like to point out that although the authors did seem to get the memo from Chappelle that cautioned people from using the two words “the” and “Jews” in sequence, it probably took me quoting their title before realizing that they had forgot the memo while writing their original title. As the title of the post is no longer “When Black People Defend Israel & the Jews”, which I received in my email box and I can provide proof for anyone, but rather “When Black People Defend Israel & Jews”. I just wanted to point that out since my comment includes “the Jews” because I was quoting the original title of the post, not because I was channeling the spirit of Ye.
We should take a moment of silence to meditate on the irony of a post signaling it’s pious fealty to Zionists and the government of Israel using the phrase “the Jews” in the title. An innocent slip or evidence of secret anti-semitism????????
It is quite curious that such an adjustment was made. Seems like whoever really wanted the article written requested the edit. Or...those who published it could explain why “the” was such a problem that it needed to be removed. 🤔
I guess someone should tell them to change the image text as well huh? 🤣🫣
Lol. I didn’t see that before. Classy.
Moreover, IF folk wanna look at “Jew” as a race, they would have been an Alekbulani (i.e. African) people. Prior to the Suez Canal, Israel was solidly on the continent called Africa.