MURDER, POLITICS, AND THE END OF THE JAZZ AGE
by Michael Wolraich
Order today at Barnes & Noble / Amazon / Books-A-Million / Bookshop
|
|
|
From the Readers
- barefooted 10 months ago
- PeraclesPlease 11 months ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- artappraiser 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- artappraiser 1 year ago
Creative corner
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- PeraclesPlease 1 year ago
- artappraiser 1 year ago
- artappraiser 1 year ago
From the Dagbloggers
- Michael Wolraich 1 year 3 weeks ago
- Danny Cardwell 3 years 3 months ago
- Doctor Cleveland 4 years 3 weeks ago
- PeraclesPlease 4 years 2 months ago
- PeraclesPlease 4 years 2 months ago
- William K. Wolfrum 4 years 2 months ago
- William K. Wolfrum 4 years 2 months ago
- Doctor Cleveland 4 years 3 months ago
- Doctor Cleveland 4 years 4 months ago
- William K. Wolfrum 4 years 4 months ago
Hits of the Day
- rmrd0000 (149)
- artappraiser (99)
- artappraiser (79)
- artappraiser (71)
- artappraiser (63)
America's most important Israel argument is happening on campuses
By A Guy Called LULU on Sun, 01/26/2014 - 8:24pm |Hillel's Crackdown on Open Debate is Bad News for American Jews. In response to the guidelines, Jesse Bacon of Jewish Voice for Peace wrote: "Rather than include all Jewish groups that are motivated inter alia by ahavat Yisrael (the love of the Jewish people) Hillel has decided that the litmus test for sponsorship to be ahavat medinat yisrael (the love of the State of Israel) So a rightwing ultranationalist group like Zionist Freedom Alliance, which doesn't recognize the Palestinian people and asserts that the Jews have sovereign rights over every inch of the Land of Israel from the Jordan to the Mediterranean, is kosher; but Jewish Voice for Peace, which supports self-determination for the Israeli and Palestinian peoples, is treif [non-kosher]."
URL:
http://www.newrepublic.com/article/116100/hillel-college-campuses-fractures-students-debate-israel
- Add new comment
- 1156 reads
Comments
by A Guy Called LULU on Sun, 01/26/2014 - 8:29pm
Without getting into the substance of the Open Hillel question or BDS...
If these folks "oppose the idea of ethnic nation-states altogether" but ONLY work to oppose Israel, then that may not be anti-Semitism, but it is at least a glaring form of hypocrisy, it seems to me.
Will they soon, or concurrently, be holding rallies against Saudi Arabia, Iran, all the officially Muslim states, religious parties like Erdogan's?
Or are they going to take the approach of implicit resignation to their existence, perhaps with the vague hope that these countries will evolve into pluralistic democracies...at some point?
You can't answer that question, I know, so I'm not really asking you, but I feel that the answer is swimming around simply based on the sort of activities one sees.
I mean, IF they were TRULY against "the idea of ethnic nation-states," wouldn't we be seeing symposia on that IDEA with discussions of its exemplars, namely SA, Syria, Iran, Israel, etc., discussions of similarities and differences, proposals for trying to effect change in those countries whether through BDS or XYZ?
IOW, wouldn't they be attacking the idea rather than just one example of it?
Some folks will respond to this by saying, "Yes, but I'm Jewish; therefore, I'm tribal enough to care much more about what my people are doing than what Saudis are doing." Not an excuse for non-Jews, I'd say, but fair enough. But still that isn't very enlightened of them in the Enlightenment sense of that word. It's sort of ethnic-centered. So they become tribal at the very moment they're arguing for universalist values.
I mean, if "ethnic nation states" REALLY offend your moral compass...if you really want to see them come to an end...then why-oh-why pick on just one? And such a small one at that?
My sense, as I said to Jolly, is that these folks are resigned to a demographic might makes right logic. How ya going to change Iran or Saudi Arabia? They're full of Muslims, after all. But Israel is small enough, perhaps, to pick off. I dunno.
by Peter Schwartz on Mon, 01/27/2014 - 10:29am
I posted a link to this Jan. 6 article on your Alan Dershowitz thread on Jan. 11:
http://dagblog.com/link/alan-dershowitz-wants-you-18056#comment-188526
You replied to that comment. Doesn't reflect well on your open-mindedness that you didn't check it out at that time, before replying to me, and post it as "news" now. You just presumed my links totally always argue my point of view so you don't need to check them out before replying?
by artappraiser on Mon, 01/27/2014 - 6:22am
Thanks for the reminder, both of where I had seen the article before and of my ongoing character flaw, the closed-mindedness thing, that I haven't completely overcome even after years of trying. I'm reminded often how damaging that can be to a free flow of ideas so I will keep working on it.
I had read a number of things on the subject and become interested before beginning that first thread. I have remained interested and yesterday from somewhere I followed another link to the same place and read it more closely than I did before when the very idea had become contentious and the charge was made [not by you] that the subject was "none of my fucking business".
In the instant case, while I feel that the in-depth article does support the view I took into the conversation, [and maybe that is why it did not stick in my mind as already having been made available here by someone else] I never suspected that it expressed anything you agreed with since your clearly expressed evaluation of it was, "Big whoop de do, those folks should start another club that's anti-Hillel, see if they can compete and take away Hillel's members."
Your complete dismissal of its saying anything of worth might be why I forgot that you had linked to it and then commented on it, but no, I could see that the article didn't totally argue your point of view which was that the breakaway stand of Open Hillel is just one big woop de do.
by A Guy Called LULU on Mon, 01/27/2014 - 8:42am
The claim that anyone told you that Hillel is "none of your fucking business" is simply false, and I only bring this up as a point of privilege--since we know you're talking about me.
I had written to you in connection with your apparent intense interest in Hillel that folks in that organization could or would say go fuck yourself if you challenged their policy, because it's private. I then changed that, didn't want to make it sound personal, and so if you go back to that comment you will see that I changed it to something like if we challenged them they would tell us to go fuck ourselves. That's the way the comment reads. Of course, you are referring to a comment that was ultimately edited. You know that because for some reason you found that relevant and kept harping on my edits--even though I edited in a way that didn't sound as if I was singling you out with an F bomb. [See below for how it was edited to erase any notion that I was singling you out as you contend here--my whole point was that Hillel was private and therefore none of our f..ng business.]
You are more than welcome to the last word if you'd like.
Here is the text I presume you're referring to. I didn't save the original version, but if you did feel free to post it if you think it's important and you will see that, at most, you object to a comment that was edited to remove that which you purported to find objectionable (or something):
Edited over and over again.
by Bruce Levine on Mon, 01/27/2014 - 12:21pm
It's funny Bruce, in that the reason I pointed to the New Republic article in the first place is because I was trying to point out to Lulu this difference: between focusing on the infighting in a single private student organization about what it does and chooses to be and focusing on the growing popularity of student organizations questioning Israeli policy and U.S. policy on Israel and Israeli policy. I felt the New Republic article handled the story the right way, as opposed to the previous articles that Lulu had posted which focused on the internal Hillel brouhaha and nothing else. That for the internel Hillel brouhaha to have much meaning for the general public at all, it should be framed in context of other things happening, too. To me, approaching it in the other way is really just like reporting gossip about a private organization, and one should not be surprised when people outside that milieu don't find the story of major importance. And that people might rightly question why outsiders should be so so so very interested in disagreements within a single student organization. I started the comment with this point: You might consider that maybe so few have shown interest in all the ASA and Hillel stuff because it's a little too much like when the Santa Monica CA city council holds a vote on the Iraq war.
by artappraiser on Mon, 01/27/2014 - 2:48pm
Oh and and I'd like to add my personal take on the New Republic article: I'm still not that impressed or interested. Why doncha report back, Mr. Judis, after more of the students involved have taken a few more History and International Relations courses, and decided to support BDS or whatever of countries like Lebanon and/or Jordan and/or Egypt as well. Then I might find this surprising and of major interest. Otherwise, it's the same old same old "all the Mideast's problems are about Israel" syndrome, and I don't see any news in that. Nor is it something I expect from people educated about the nuances of the Palestinian problem.
by artappraiser on Mon, 01/27/2014 - 3:14pm
That's OK, nobody is forcing you.
I think. and I have to hope, that taking a few more from any category of college courses won't somehow impart to those idealistic students a moral or ethical philosophy that tells them that if they cannot affect change everywhere they shouldn't try to do so anywhere. I am not surprised that a Jewish college kid in America feels the right to and the inclination to speak out on their feelings about Israel or even to act on them. Good on em.
Even if considered from a completely neutral position as to which countries and their governments are responsible for anything good or bad in the MidEast, it cannot be missed that the place does have some big-time troubles. It is burning and it could explode. And, Israel is right in the middle of those troubles. The BDS movement may fizzle, but it might not. What is growing more obvious every time the issue is looked at is that the weight and manor of push-back against it shows that the possibility of it continuing to grow is scaring the hell out of a hell of a lot of lot of people. They are not ignoring the movement like they would if it didn't somehow threaten them. Here is some news, the arc of the movement s still going up. If it continues to do so I expect that at some point it will become news to you too.
The movement aint history yet, it is news right now even though there is nothing that is news to everybody.
by A Guy Called LULU on Mon, 01/27/2014 - 4:23pm
Yea, but you made the point much more nicely than I did. I understand that the most recent Pew Study, which you and I addressed on here I think, has been and can be interpreted to see a growing detachment by younger Jews to the Jewish community. And I guess you could look to the Hillel policy or whatever it is that is otherwise affecting American foreign relations as contributing to that detachment. Interesting discussion.
As a Jewish American, I would prefer that all college students get a broad-based exposure to all kinds of ideas, but I would be careful not impose a speaking code on private groups on campuses. As an American Jew, I think Hillel should be really really careful about how it limits speech to the students who continue to be attracted to the organization, and I would always err on the side of free speech unless I could be convinced otherwise that a certain restriction was called for.
And caricatures aside about the state of American Jewish youth (no not Zappa's to those of you of a certain age and proclivity), I sure as hell didn't raise my kids to be showroom dummies. So I guess I would say that perhaps we should favor reality over caricature around these parts.
by Bruce Levine on Mon, 01/27/2014 - 3:45pm
Just a quick question: Did LULU cross some line of online protocol or good manners here? I was under the impression that things got reposted all the time. Or is "news" the stumbling block here?
by Peter Schwartz on Mon, 01/27/2014 - 10:11am
Repeating what I thought my comment made clear: I was specifically reacting to Lulu posting it as if the article was news to him, even though he had replied at length to the comment in which I had linked to the article.
Nobody in their right mind expects someone to review everything on a website before they post something to make sure it's not repetition. There are no posted rules that I know about regarding how to use the "In the News" section as opposed to the "Blog Now" option on this site. (Though I must say that most could rightly question the reading comprehension of someone who posted something like a year-old article in a section titled "In The News," That is not the case here.)
by artappraiser on Mon, 01/27/2014 - 2:27pm
I didn't know "news" had to be "news to the poster." Hopefully, it's newsworthy or just worth knowing or discussing.
by Peter Schwartz on Mon, 01/27/2014 - 6:58pm