[The Immortal Goon]

Part of the issue is that Iraeli citizenship isn't a blanket invitation to every Palestinian (like it is to every Jewish person) and on the other hand, a Palestinian accepting said citizenship goes a good degree in invalidating a right to Palestinian citizenship.

The problem for Israel, and one that it is aware it's getting closer too, is that the more territory that it takes, the more Palestinians will be in its borders. They then have the unenviable decision to give a blanket citizenship, which will undermine their own political process; selectively offer it along religious and ethnic lines, attempting to keep an artificial majority while serving transparent lip service to the outside world; or embrace an apartheid state.

The middle choice is what they're doing, but that's going to become increasingly untenable, and I do know that they know it.

Politically, there is a rather large divide in Israeli politics and the right needs the focus and energy of a lot of the religious zealots. The same divide between reality and zealotry is happening in the US more slowly, and was the cause of the Strange Death of Liberal England.

[Rich]

but then I don't believe in Science as some fundamentally different epistemology.

From what specifically?

From religion. I think the scientific method is a myth. No I will correct that. I know the scientific method is a myth.

[mikema63]

How pray tell do you know that?

[kobe]

You seem to care about black people though, so I would recommend reading up on what happens to them in Israel. This guy's videos are a good start.

I mean if I lived in that area I would probably have the same opinion that guy did, but I think it's a separate issue from the issue of Palestinian liberation. The problem is that there are too many theocracies in the neighborhood for me to really be at arms and single out Israel. Do I think they should give Palestine their own state? Absolutely. Do I think there are many racist Israelis? Absolutely. I'm also sympathetic to the Jewish state because my family was affected by the Jewish diaspora from Europe. Furthermore the only reason they have the territory they have is because of the invasion attempts upon them. It's not as cut and dry as pro-Palestine activists like to make it. If there was a clear group to support in the liberation of Palestine, I would do so, but who is said group that has real capabilities of functioning as a state?

I do think that the Israeli colonial state is problematic, but I'm not ready to buy into the pro-Palestine narrative.

[Pongo]

The reason why most of Israeli academics follow the post Zionism (the Israeli version of “post-modernism”) is because postmodernism is the dominant coin in the humanities, rejecting it would harm your conference CVs and careers. once an intellectual movement have attained intellectual predominance, it is not surprising that Israeli academics would be attracted to Anti Zionists intellectuals as members of a socially dominant and prestigious group and as dispensers of valued resources. Such a perspective fits well with an evolutionary perspective on group dynamics: Academic group negotiating the intellectual status hierarchy would be attracted to the characteristics of the most dominant members of the hierarchy, especially if they viewed the hierarchy as permeable.


Neil Gross and Ethan Fosse, “Why are professors liberal?”, write "once an organization becomes dominated by a particular intellectual perspective, there is enormous inertia created by the fact that the informal networks dominating elite universities serve as gatekeepers for the next generation of scholars. Aspiring academics are subjected to a high level of indoctrination at the undergraduate and graduate levels; there is tremendous psychological pressure to adopt the fundamental intellectual assumptions that lie at the center of the power hierarchy of the discipline. Once such a movement attains intellectual predominance, it is not surprising that people would attracted to these movements because of the prestige associated with them. And, as Gross and Fosse argue, conservatives who are turned off by these ideas, simply self-select to go into a different line of work."


The case of the Israeli academy and universities

Post-modernism, critical thinking and criticism on Zionism

Ofira Seliktar places the roots of the Jewish criticism of Zionism in the critical theory Ideology (which she also identifies as Post-Modernism). Frilling also identifies the origin of criticism about Zionism in post-modern thinking. Scholars such as Derrida, Foucault and Lyotard formulated philosophies that rebelled against the comprehensive ideologies and every metta-narrative.

Another post-modern origin is the Annales School, which brought the new wave of history writing in Europe, focusing in the multiplicity of narratives. These theories were used to criticize nationality, as the imposed narrative of the ruling elites. By using multiple narratives instead of the single narrative of nationality, one can reflect the power structure of the society.

The Annales School has also broadened the writing of history from the history of the elites to the history of the common people. We can see how these ideas were later used to influence Post-Zionists scholars (such as Pappe) in diverting the focus of research from the Zionist elite to its 'victims' (i.e. the Palestinians and the Mizrachi Jews).

Seliktar also notes the importance of Neo-Marxism to the Critical Theory. Thinkers such as Gundar, Cardozo and Amin had led to the birth of the 'dependency movement' which argued that today's Third World (periphery) status is a function of the exploiting capitalist colonial First World. Other Neo-Marxists such as Eric Hobsbawm saw nationalities as a modern artificial creation. According to the Marxist tradition, the elites invent false nationality to preserve their interests.

Other thinkers focus on the importance of the Neo-Marxist Frankfurt School to the emergence of the Critical Theory. Benzaquen focuses on the utopian nature of Adorno's and Horkheimer's philosophy. She portrays some of the fundamental critiques that they have made on the capitalist society- the false determinism of enlightenment, the reproduction of culture, and the continued oppressing capitalism. Their idea of utopia was mainly derived from the Marxist Jargon of a just society.
Gur-Ze'ev further explains the Frankfurt School criticism on the Western structure of capitalist states. Frankfurt School's critical thinking depicts the structure of the state as a sophistication of the totalitarian model of oppression. This oppression is based on the subjugation of the individual to the might of the market forces.

Seliktar shows how the critical theory roots have been interpreted in the Jewish context to a severe criticism on the essentials of Zionism: The 'New Historians' used the critical theory tools and methods to undermine the traditional Zionist narrative and by that to undermine its legitimacy; the work of Benjamin Morris has challenged the myth of voluntary Palestinian exodus in the 1948 war (and later, Ophir described it as genocidal); the work of critical sociologists like Ram, who was influenced by the Marxist critical theory, depicted the Ashkenazi Zionism as a market-driven global economic system which exploits both Mizrachim and the indigenous Arabs. Following Gramsci's ideas on hegemony, the critical sociologists have used their intellectual posts to expand their influence. These examples aggregate to a clear anti-Zionist conclusion: Much like Uri Ram, critical scholars "reject the notion that Jews have a legitimate claim to Israel".

Post-Zionist criticism on Zionism
The case of Post-Zionism is discussed here for several reasons. First, as was mentioned in the beginning of this chapter, Post-Zionism is a specific example of Jews criticizing the legitimacy of the existence of Israel as a Jewish state. Second, the Post Zionist thinking is a continuum of the theories mentioned above, implemented by Jewish scholars on the Israeli case. And third, The Post-Zionist scholars have wielded great influence by supporting the Anti-Zionist agenda abroad, including supporting academic boycott initiatives.

Ran Aaronsohn states that Post-Zionism is a local Israeli variant of the world-wide school of Post-Modernism (in which Post-Colonialism and critical theory are significant components), Shlomo Aronson agrees with that depiction, and portrays some of the influence of the radical scholars abroad on local Post-Zionist scholars. For instance we can see the influence of the Neo-Marxist Frankfurt School on Ilan Gur-Ze'ev or the influence of Hobsbawm on Amos Elon and Tom Segev. Taub also draws a direct connection not only between Post-Zionism and the European thinking of post-modernism but also to the American Post-Colonialism.


Gadi Taub stresses the connection between post-modern philosophy and method, and the Post-Zionist one. Taub shows how the post-modern method of plural narratives influenced the Post-Zionists who support other narratives besides the Zionist narrative, especially the Palestinian narrative.

‘Tenured Radicals’ in Israel: From New Zionism to Political Activism
OFIRA SELIKTAR

The article sees the “post-Zionism” of that group of academics as the Israeli version of “post-modernism”, a trendy critical theory among Western academics over the last 50 years.

There are different approaches in post modernism, among them the interpretive approach as propounded by Michel Foucalt, Jacques Deride, Jean LeCan and the German philosopher, Jurgen Habermas who claimed that the accepted “social narratives” reflect the power structure in a given society. The neo-Marxist approach, among whose central scholars are Andre Gunder Frank, Henrik Cardozo and Samir Amin, criticized free-market democracy and introduced the “dependencia” movement to the world. Researchers from the Dependencia School claimed that socialism and not free-market democracy is the ultimate destiny of mankind. Edward Said, who adopted the fundamentally economic critique of Samir Amin, developed his highly influential cultural criticism known as “Orientalism”. In a book of the same name published by Said, he claims that the West misrepresented the Arab societies and described them as a backward, threatening “other”, in order to justify colonial conquest.

Critical approaches to international relations developed and became “constructivism”, which claimed that a state is shaped in accordance with its identity needs and profound fears, including the view of the “other”. During the Cold War, the constructivist school propounded the theory that the Soviet Union is nothing more than a ghost, a product of the American military-industrial complex, and that it, in reality, poses no threat to the West.

Through adoption of this “revolution by method” as it was characterized by a famous radical critical humanist, the critical scholars were liberated from the shackles of empirical social scholarship practiced by their colleagues who conduct themselves in accordance with behaviorist scholarship concepts and methods. A leading Israeli scholar phrased it thus: “Post-Zionism is a semi-analytical, semi-normative approach, which challenges the traditional Zionist way of thinking.” Equipped with the tools of the sort provided them by the critical theory, the critical scholars or Israeli post-Zionists have succeeded in producing mounds of theories and interpretations. For example, the attempt of the “new historians” to deconstruct the traditional “Zionist narrative” that was constructed around the period of the establishment of the State of Israel and the fate of the Palestinian people is well known. Benny Morris started it, and it was continued and elaborated upon by Ilan Pappe, Avi Schleim and others; “new historians” who deal with the “myths” that became part of the traditional database including the “myth” of the balance of power, the “myth” that the Palestinians left of their own volition and the “myth” of the intransigence of the Palestinians.

Beyond their rejection of the founding narrative of the Jewish state, critical scholars, like Uri Ram, reject the notion that the Jews have a legitimate right to the Land of Israel. Basing himself on Said, Ram claims that the “Zionist project” is a colonialist enterprise, which does not grant the Jews any more rights to Palestine than the British had to India.

A School of Thought in Service of Political Activism:
De-Legitimatization of Israel as a Means towards the Liberation of the Palestinian People

True to the mandate that they assumed to change society, the scholars of the critical school turn to political activity with the objective of underscoring the illegitimacy of the occupation. As Ophir put it, they are motivated by the fear that “rule over the Palestinians” led to “the adoption of political patterns of an ethnocentric, racist nation-state”. Many of the scholars are involved in the “Campus is Not Silent” organization, a group that has branches in Tel Aviv University and in the Hebrew University in Jerusalem. The group was founded in 1996, as a continuation of “Ad Kan”, a movement that was established during the first intifada in the late 1980s. Others are active outside the group, which numbers 150 faculty members. About 20 of them serve as the spearhead, others participate in the organization and there are those who exploit their academic research projects to promote its primary objective – the de-legitimatization of Israel.

Attempts to mobilize international pressure involve a range of strategies – awareness raising through the use of media outlets in the United States and in Europe; turning to sympathetic organizations like the UN Human Rights Committee and NGOs involved in human rights, groups affiliated with international churches; support of sanctions like the boycott of universities, institutions and companies that encourage the “occupation” and others.

Since agreement has not been reached as to the optimal manner in which to duplicate the success enjoyed by the activists in South Africa, the scholars adopted different strategies. For example, Pappe, Reinhart, Giora, Yablonka and Ram support an academic boycott and other forms of pressure; Gordon and Greenberg supported petitioning the International Court for War Crimes against IDF officers in the territories and the Commander of the Air Force whom they want to put on trial for the targeted killings. Kimmerling, who believes that “academic institutions are an indivisible part of the oppressive State of Israel, which among the other contemptible and foolish acts that it has perpetrated, has committed unforgivable crimes against the Palestinian people”, opposes an academic boycott unless it is part of a comprehensive boycott modeled after the South African one. Ophir is angry that the “shadow of anti-Semitism” prevents Europe from adopting a more severe approach vis-à-vis Israel and says that “if things continue as they are” it is possible that there will be room for the intervention of NATO, which will bomb Israel.

Despite their limited number, the critical scholars have wielded significant influence both in Israel and abroad and the boycott imposed by the British Association of University Teachers is the most conspicuous example. In order to understand how such a relatively small group of academics can achieve such impressive results, a more profound understanding of their methods of operation is necessary.

[skinster]

You don't need to be Jewish to have Israeli citizenship. Israeli Arabs are not Jews, after all, and yet they have Israeli nationality and citizenship with all the perks that come with them like minorities in other liberal democratic countries do. When this is taken into consideration, Apartheid allegations seem completely ridiculous.

Israeli Arabs are discriminated against. The Palestinians in the West Bank have few rights and those in Gaza have none and are imprisoned. To pretend apartheid isn't a thing in Israel-Palestine is beyond laughable, but unsurprising coming from you, given you spend most of your time here apologizing for Israeli oppression and pretending it's a liberal democracy.

There is widespread perception that Israel is not a liberal democracy among whom? The very same anti-Israel people?

Liberal democracies don't put people in concentration camps and deny them their rights.

I do think that the Israeli colonial state is problematic, but I'm not ready to buy into the pro-Palestine narrative.

That's because you drank the kool-aid.
[youtube]TOaxAckFCuQ[/youtube]


Also, The National Women's Studies Association [NWSA] has just endorsed BDS.

[Pongo]

Recent knife intifada is also fueled by the fact that Israel has admitted numerous terrorists via "family reunification" programs. While all the terrorists who have committed terrorist acts in the past several weeks were Israeli residents, either from Jerusalem or, as in the case of the terrorist who committed Knife attack in Be'er Sheva, from a Bedouin village in the Negev. All eight of them were products of “mixed” families, residents of Gaza or Arab villages in Palestinian Authority-controlled areas that were allowed to live in Israel as part of 'family reunification' programs. All over the Islamic world as in traditional Palestinian society, a wife is expected to move in with her husband’s family. In Israel the Palestinian husband demanding to move to his wife family, in order to take advantage on Israel social rights and forcing Palestinian national "right of return" in order to make Israel lost its Jewish character.

In 2003, after the outbreak of the Second Intifada, the government passed a temporary order denying the granting of citizenship or residency to Palestinians living in the Gaza Strip or the West Bank.

The order, enshrined in the Citizenship and Entry into Israel Law, specifies that the reasoning behind the limitations was due to an increase of Israeli Arab involvement in terrorist activities. According to a Shin Bet report from 2006, about 40 percent of those involved in terrorism among Israeli Arabs were Palestinians holding Israeli identity cards or residency permits acquired by the process of family reunification.

[Rich]

Liberal democracies don't put people in concentration camps and deny them their rights.

Would you care to reconsider this statement. Its a bit like saying Liberal Democracies don't carry out genocidal air bombing campaigns.

[wat0n]

Israeli Arabs are discriminated against.

And African Americans are also discriminated against, so are Muslims and Romanis in Europe in general. Yet both the US and EU members are liberal democracies.

The Palestinians in the West Bank have few rights and those in Gaza have none and are imprisoned.

Excuse me? Gazans live under the regime led by Hamas, the very resistance organization you defend and justify. If you have any complaints on Hamas' treatment of their subjects, don't whine to me.

Oh, and if Gazans aren't allowed into Israel and Egypt, maybe their rulers shouldn't wage war against Israel and attempt to undermine the government of Egypt. For all you whining, I do not see you whining over the fact that people with Israeli stamps on their passports cannot enter countries like Lebanon.

To pretend apartheid isn't a thing in Israel-Palestine is beyond laughable, but unsurprising coming from you, given you spend most of your time here apologizing for Israeli oppression and pretending it's a liberal democracy.

What's actually laughable is to see someone who spends time justifying stabbing Palestinians Israeli Jewish children, and only the Jewish children, posing as an anti-racist

Spare me that crap.

Liberal democracies don't put people in concentration camps and deny them their rights.

Neither does Israel, so no issue in that, though liberal democracies have actually placed people in concentration camps and denied them their rights at times.

[skinster]

Would you care to reconsider this statement. Its a bit like saying Liberal Democracies don't carry out genocidal air bombing campaigns.

That works too.

And African Americans are also discriminated against, so are Muslims and Romanis in Europe in general. Yet both the US and EU members are liberal democracies.

What laws are in place in European countries that deny rights to Blacks/Muslims etc. in the same way that Israel denies rights to Palestinians?

Excuse me? Gazans live under the regime led by Hamas, the very resistance organization you defend and justify. If you have any complaints on Hamas' treatment of their subjects, don't whine to me.

Israel imprisons Gazans in what is now reminiscent of a particular concentration camp that was in Europe a bunch of decades ago.

What's actually laughable is to see someone who spends time justifying stabbing Palestinians Israeli Jewish children, and only the Jewish children, posing as an anti-racist

The anti-Semite card is so

You keep saying this and I ask you to quote when I've done the above, something you never can do. You're just attempting to paint me as something negative to give weight to your own hasbara, but that shit is transparent these days and continues to be more and more, which is why threads like this are made; more people and organizations support the boycott of Israel because hasbara doesn't work anymore, except for zionists, who can only convince each other with that bs and no-one else. Not anymore.

More organizations boycotting Israel:
88.4% of votes cast by National Women's Studies Association in favor of BDS

GMIT Students’ Union has officially joined the international Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions movement, which calls for an academic, cultural, and economic boycott of the state of Israel.

[Pongo]

BDS developed its web site with Israeli made software, WIX

http://www.timesofisrael.com/pro-bds-st ... tform-wix/

Pro-BDS group uses Israeli platform Wix to build website

Students for Justice in Palestine logo
A university group that supports the Boycott, Divestment, Sanctions movement built a website for its activities using the free Israeli website builder Wix.


The successful Tel Aviv-based company provides a platform for free website building and reportedly has over 50 million users as of 2014.

The Students for Justice in Palestine at the University of Denver recently set up a website using the service, prompting criticism that it was not really practicing BDS.

The group published a post on its Facebook page on Wednesday defending its actions and linking to a longer statement by the group’s branch at Cornell University in New York State two years ago, which was slammed for the same thing.

“Let us be clear: BDS is not abstention, nor an absolute moral principle. It is not isolation or withdrawal, and it does not entail a rejection of everything Israeli. It is not anti-Semitic, and it has nothing to do with the merits of Israeli technology. BDS is not the attempt of beautiful souls to avoid contamination with oppression and keep their own hands clean: it is a tactic within a larger strategy, and it is beginning to work,” the group posted from the Cornell statement on Facebook.

“The idea that supporters of BDS must avoid contact with anything Israeli not only misconstrues the nature of BDS, but also contorts the idea of politics in general,” SJP at Cornell wrote in its longer statement.

“Those who call us hypocritical for not adhering to a rigid logic of separation simplistically insinuate that if one believes in boycotting Israel one must do it absolutely and deprive oneself of all the innovative benefits of the ‘Start-up Nation’; since one is opposed to Israel, one must not be in contact with anything Israeli,” it added.

The website for SJP at the University of Denver was still up and running on Wix as of Friday morning.

[Pongo]

:lol:

I already told you before you can't boycott Israel. The Jewish brain is the engine of the world. Right now you use a computer and cellphone developed by Israeli research. The academic boycott is the most bizarre. Would you boycott Haartez and Breaking the Silence? They are the same people. Traitors

[Hong Wu]

In Japan universities received a notice from the education minister telling them to either abolish their undergraduate departments and graduate schools devoted to the humanities and social sciences or shift their curricula to fields with greater utilitarian values.


http://www.japantimes.co.jp/opinion/201 ... lN7GXpXerX

I think the Japanese are on the right track here. I'm sure there will still be degrees in humanities and literature but those have traditionally been pursuits for independently wealthy people and the very passionate. I don't see why it should be any other way.

As for US Anthropologists boycotting Israel... lol. Just lol.

[Pongo]

^ Hong Wu, are you Chinese from Hong Kong?

[Hong Wu]

^ Hong Wu, are you Chinese from Hong Kong?

No, I am just a Jew who is trying to learn Chinese.

[mikema63]

I already told you before you can't boycott Israel. The Jewish brain is the engine of the world. Right now you use a computer and cellphone developed by Israeli research. The academic boycott is the most bizarre. Would you boycott Haartez and Breaking the Silence? They are the same people. Traitors

Oh yes, all the famous developers and inventors of computers and cell phones were definitely Israeli.

Like Babbage, Turing, Bill Gates, Steve Jobs, etc. etc.

[skinster]

Shut up, Mike, Israel invented everything good that you use. Including stuff like water and air. Be grateful, you rotten shitbag!

[mikema63]

What would we do without Israel? Probably be living in mud huts that's what!

[skinster]

How to make the case for Israel and win

[Rich]

How to make the case for Israel and win

I have to say its a pretty good case, even when its meant to be a parody. The devastating power of the pro Israeli case shines though - love it. One thing that does stand out though, is the Arab lover accusation. True Arab lovers like myself want to see a free Arab State established in the Levant utterly cleansed of all Muslim terrorists. I see no reason why such a state should not live in peace and harmony with Israel. the Assads have feted the Sunni Muslims for decades, how is it going now Assad with your Sunni Muslim friends? Did they appreciate all you have done for them? Are they grateful?