Anti-Semitic artwork? You mean, those people of any ethnicity who do not support Zionism, which is an ethno-centric form of identity politics? FAIR is supposed to be against identity politics, so this bizarre exception made for Zionism by some in our organization is just bizarre, and it is going to cause a lot of internal fighting.
Anti-Semitic artwork? You mean, those people of any ethnicity who do not support Zionism, which is an ethno-centric form of identity politics? FAIR is supposed to be against identity politics, so this bizarre exception made for Zionism by some in our organization is just bizarre, and it is going to cause a lot of internal fighting.
Since Zionism is only "an ethno-centric form of identity politics" by an extremely tendentious reading, the organization is making no exception here. It is adhering to a liberal view of tolerance that suffers more than one view on the matter to exist. FAIR will be fine, but as an avowed enemy of liberalism, it may not be for you.
Here's the thing, Franklin. I'm not a liberal. I'm an egalitarian socialist who is very much against identity politics. Any ideology that favors a specific ethnic and/or religious group over others, demands exceptional treatment for said group(s), and justifies/rationalizes any type of behavior any organization or government allegedly enacts on said group's behalf, and then dismisses all criticism of said behavior to hatred/bigotry against that demographic, is a textbook example of identity politics.
That description fits Zionism quite well, so there is nothing tendentious about it. Demanding an exception for that form of politics for an ideology claiming to be acting an behalf of *all* Jews, and then justifying anything Israel does, or the U.S. government passing laws to ban criticism against Zionism on university campuses, is doing exactly what FAIR is supposed to be against. As these threads make clear, this is creating a huge conflict within FAIR that calls the genuine commitment to its actual purpose into question.
So, yes, so attempting to insert Zionism into FAIR is going to cause a lot of problems. I would only be considered a liberal if I was demanding exceptional treatment for Palestinians and Sharia Law. But I'm not.
I have been involved in this organization for years, and Zionism has only today become a source of conflict because a self-described socialist with a worthless definition of Zionism - that would be you - showed up and started one. Since the vast majority of Jews support Israel, this organization recognizes that much anti-Zionism is in fact second-order antisemitism, that even principled anti-Zionists would have no business antagonizing and deplatforming Zionists in the manner chronicled above by Wald, and that speaking out against this is entirely keeping with FAIR's mission, which I recommend you re-read.
The classical liberal values espoused in the Vision are not compatible with socialism. Socialism disdains individual rights in favor of collectivist obligations, and the fact that identity politics and socialism have dovetailed so cleanly in Western politics is not an accident.
Zionism has been largely accepted for years in an organization dedicated to combating identity politics and demands for exceptional treatment by a certain demographic based on past injustices until I started critiquing such an obvious disparity and conflict of interest? I find that hard to believe, Franklin.
The great majority of Jewish people who are subject to constant propaganda about Zionism and Israel obviously feel obliged to support it, but a significant minority do not. Just because the majority of any specific demographic supports identity politics that they believe offers them certain privileges based on calling the Victim Card doesn't make it right any more than any other group who may be doing it for other forms of identity politics or ethno-centric or theocra-centric reasons.
That should *not* be a reason for an org with the mission statement of FAIR to support any type of identity politics just because the majority of a certain demographic supports it. The majority of the world population outside of Jewish people do not support Zionism, which is also important to consider. What Israel does in the name of identity politics, which is identical to what other groups do in favor of such ideologies, should be enough for the org to condemn it, not support it.
Secondly, Franklin, no one here is talking about deplatforming Zionists. Opposition to Zionists having political & economic power to wage war on its behalf and de-platform or arrest people on its behalf or write support for it into the actual legal framework of nations is not the same thing as demanding silence on the issue. And we have every right to insist that an organization that purports to be against identity politics not to promote any form of identity politics because that calls the validity of their entire mission statement into question.
As for not having the right to "antagonize" Zionists? Sorry, but people should have every right to criticize what we disagree with, both publicly and especially within an organization that is supposed to be against identity politics in general. It is Zionists and all proponents of any form of identity politics that demand people be de-platformed or penalized legally or fired from jobs etc for critiquing identity politics.
And "socialism" as you describe it is not the same thing as what was promoted in its classical form by Marx and Engels. We are entirely in favor of civil liberties, which is what a classless economy would provide -- no bureaucrats or capitalists to control and regulate speech or decisions. And which would be bereft of the forms of material-based competition that results in identity politics. Classical Marxian socialism in no way dovetails with identity politics, because the latter is a creature of class ruled society, the proof being that it is promoted and financed by uber-capitalist firms like BlackRock, State Street, J.P. Morgan, and Disney... and yes, ultra-wealthy lobbyist groups like AIPAC. It doesn't matter if said sources claim to espouse left-wing or right-wing values of any sort... both the Left and the Right have their own iterations of identity politics that one favors but the other does not.
So no, I do not think that criticizing Zionism is tantamount to second-order antisemitism any more than trying to connect liberalism and its forms of identity politics is indicative of being racist or sexist or homophobic. Latching an ideology onto a demographic of people and demanding no criticism of the ideology because of it is what identity politics are all about.
Fine, don't believe it. So long as you characterize Zionism as identity politics, which FAIR does not and should not, understanding about that and much else will continue to elude you.
Marx disdained civil liberties as "the rights of egoistic man" and similar in an odious tract titled "On The Jewish Question."
In that case, FAIR needs to specifically define what it means by identity politics, and then explain how Zionism deviates against it to the point that it should be heavily promoted, including the war-mongering activities of Israel and the control AIPAC has over the government. I have already explained how Zionism is textbook identity politics.
Marx never disdained civil liberties because a classless and stateless system -- which the Soviet Union most certainly was not -- would not possess the apparatus to enforce the authoritarian dictates of a few. Opposition to Zionism gaining power within a government is not the same thing as banning people following it socially on a personal level. If someone wants to promote Jewish art, that is fine, just as promoting Hindu art is fine. Or wearing traditional Jewish beanies to signify that you're of that religion. Also fine. But trying to impose Zionism or Sharia Law etc on a national level is inherently authoritarian, as is trying to ban criticism of either.
And I have already explained that you're wrong. Again, FAIR doesn't promote Zionism, "heavily" or otherwise. Yes, you could demand a full accounting of what FAIR means by "identity politics." Alternately you could form an organization of anti-identitarian socialists that would suit you better. That would suit me better as well, as I'm not much impressed with your outpouring of complaint at an organization with which you have no history and to which you've made no evident contribution.
Marx quite expressly spends a lot of "Jewish Question" mocking the "so-called rights of man." "The establishment of the political state and the dissolution of civil society into independent individuals... is accomplished by one and the same act." The stateless system was somehow going to unmake the individual so he could rejoin what Rousseau called the "larger whole." Classical liberalism rejects this, recognizing the individual as the atomic unit of politics. FAIR is a classical liberal organization.
"And I have already explained that you're wrong. Again, FAIR doesn't promote Zionism, "heavily" or otherwise."
I see otherwise. We need to bring this matter to a head with the administration, which is what these threads are gradually doing.
"Yes, you could demand a full accounting of what FAIR means by "identity politics." Alternately you could form an organization of anti-identitarian socialists that would suit you better."
So, you're saying that FAIR should have a right-wing leaning, with no socialists allowed, even though those of us on the Classical Left oppose identity politics as much as anyone associated with the Right? Most people who are not on the Mainstream Liberal Left oppose identity politics. But unfortunately, people all over the spectrum support Zionism because it has strong religious connotations with Christians with right-wing leanings.
"That would suit me better as well, as I'm not much impressed with your outpouring of complaint at an organization with which you have no history and to which you've made no evident contribution."
Translation: You disagree with what I'm saying. I get that.
As for contributions, I fight identity politics on a constant basis in my own publication on Substack and Medium, and I do so on a local level in my community. I've recently joined FAIR and I did not sign up for identity politics. People should complain no matter how long they have been in the organization. And I am making an argument that opposing the promotion of Zionism in an org against identity politics is apropos and necessary.
And Marxism is also a part of the Classical Left, albeit no specifically liberalism. They were very comfortable bedfellows until liberalism embraced capitalism starting in the 1990s.
Socialism is expressly opposed to the classical liberalism that underpins the organization. So yes, it should reject socialists, particularly socialists who want the organization's principles applied to them but won't exercise them for anyone else, socialists who think that the organization is promoting Zionism because they're not condemning it, and socialists who are so entitled that they characterize the organization as "right-wing" because a member who showed up last week wants to reorganize it to his liking and they're not falling over themselves to do so. It's not up to me, but you bring zero value to FAIR and they should treat you accordingly. Goodbye.
Again, Franklin, you continue to conflate Leninism/Stalinism/Maoism, which were statist forms of capitalism that included class rule and authoritarian governments run by an oligarchy, with the classless, bureaucratless, and moneyless system proposed by Marx and Engels. Creating a better world for the working class on both an economic front and regarding civil liberties is fully in line with classical liberalism, and an economic democracy would not have an authoritarian state. I think the major beef of liberalism is that it wants to retain capitalism, which does no favor for democracy.
There is a huge difference between an economic system and identity politics. FAIR made no statements of being against any economic system. You are trying to compare apples with oranges here. For instance, I have no problem with conservatives who espouse a continuation of some form of capitalism as part of FAIR. I knew that going in. But tolerating the promotion of Zionism, which is a form of identity politics in every sense of the word? That is a whole other ball of wax.
I saw plenty of articles already promoting Zionism, along with promotions of it in the comments. Creating articles that argue for students at universities being banned for protesting against Israel and calling them anti-semtic are most certainly doing that.
A member who showed up last week? Last week was just the first time you saw one of my comments. I've been following FAIR for about a year now and it's only in the past two months that I started seeing pro-Zionist articles. I was shocked to see it, as it was not what I signed up for. I went to a video orientation months ago and never was Zionism mentioned on it. I find that interesting.
"Reorganize" FAIR to "my liking"? How about simply demand that it sticks to its principles and stop giving a form of identity politics, one that is now being used to promote war across the world, the exceptional treatment that all forms of identity politics ask for? That's all I'm saying here.
I think, to the contrary, that I and others who are making these complaints are bringing immense value to FAIR, because they were pointing out a huge, glaring, and disturbing discrepancy to its stated principles where. I hope the administration eventually decides to deal with the problem as it should deal with it. And for the second time, you said goodbye to me, so I must say for a second time today that I'm sorry it came to this between us.
Anti-Semitic artwork? You mean, those people of any ethnicity who do not support Zionism, which is an ethno-centric form of identity politics? FAIR is supposed to be against identity politics, so this bizarre exception made for Zionism by some in our organization is just bizarre, and it is going to cause a lot of internal fighting.
Since Zionism is only "an ethno-centric form of identity politics" by an extremely tendentious reading, the organization is making no exception here. It is adhering to a liberal view of tolerance that suffers more than one view on the matter to exist. FAIR will be fine, but as an avowed enemy of liberalism, it may not be for you.
Here's the thing, Franklin. I'm not a liberal. I'm an egalitarian socialist who is very much against identity politics. Any ideology that favors a specific ethnic and/or religious group over others, demands exceptional treatment for said group(s), and justifies/rationalizes any type of behavior any organization or government allegedly enacts on said group's behalf, and then dismisses all criticism of said behavior to hatred/bigotry against that demographic, is a textbook example of identity politics.
That description fits Zionism quite well, so there is nothing tendentious about it. Demanding an exception for that form of politics for an ideology claiming to be acting an behalf of *all* Jews, and then justifying anything Israel does, or the U.S. government passing laws to ban criticism against Zionism on university campuses, is doing exactly what FAIR is supposed to be against. As these threads make clear, this is creating a huge conflict within FAIR that calls the genuine commitment to its actual purpose into question.
So, yes, so attempting to insert Zionism into FAIR is going to cause a lot of problems. I would only be considered a liberal if I was demanding exceptional treatment for Palestinians and Sharia Law. But I'm not.
I have been involved in this organization for years, and Zionism has only today become a source of conflict because a self-described socialist with a worthless definition of Zionism - that would be you - showed up and started one. Since the vast majority of Jews support Israel, this organization recognizes that much anti-Zionism is in fact second-order antisemitism, that even principled anti-Zionists would have no business antagonizing and deplatforming Zionists in the manner chronicled above by Wald, and that speaking out against this is entirely keeping with FAIR's mission, which I recommend you re-read.
https://www.fairforall.org/about-us/
The classical liberal values espoused in the Vision are not compatible with socialism. Socialism disdains individual rights in favor of collectivist obligations, and the fact that identity politics and socialism have dovetailed so cleanly in Western politics is not an accident.
Zionism has been largely accepted for years in an organization dedicated to combating identity politics and demands for exceptional treatment by a certain demographic based on past injustices until I started critiquing such an obvious disparity and conflict of interest? I find that hard to believe, Franklin.
The great majority of Jewish people who are subject to constant propaganda about Zionism and Israel obviously feel obliged to support it, but a significant minority do not. Just because the majority of any specific demographic supports identity politics that they believe offers them certain privileges based on calling the Victim Card doesn't make it right any more than any other group who may be doing it for other forms of identity politics or ethno-centric or theocra-centric reasons.
That should *not* be a reason for an org with the mission statement of FAIR to support any type of identity politics just because the majority of a certain demographic supports it. The majority of the world population outside of Jewish people do not support Zionism, which is also important to consider. What Israel does in the name of identity politics, which is identical to what other groups do in favor of such ideologies, should be enough for the org to condemn it, not support it.
Secondly, Franklin, no one here is talking about deplatforming Zionists. Opposition to Zionists having political & economic power to wage war on its behalf and de-platform or arrest people on its behalf or write support for it into the actual legal framework of nations is not the same thing as demanding silence on the issue. And we have every right to insist that an organization that purports to be against identity politics not to promote any form of identity politics because that calls the validity of their entire mission statement into question.
As for not having the right to "antagonize" Zionists? Sorry, but people should have every right to criticize what we disagree with, both publicly and especially within an organization that is supposed to be against identity politics in general. It is Zionists and all proponents of any form of identity politics that demand people be de-platformed or penalized legally or fired from jobs etc for critiquing identity politics.
And "socialism" as you describe it is not the same thing as what was promoted in its classical form by Marx and Engels. We are entirely in favor of civil liberties, which is what a classless economy would provide -- no bureaucrats or capitalists to control and regulate speech or decisions. And which would be bereft of the forms of material-based competition that results in identity politics. Classical Marxian socialism in no way dovetails with identity politics, because the latter is a creature of class ruled society, the proof being that it is promoted and financed by uber-capitalist firms like BlackRock, State Street, J.P. Morgan, and Disney... and yes, ultra-wealthy lobbyist groups like AIPAC. It doesn't matter if said sources claim to espouse left-wing or right-wing values of any sort... both the Left and the Right have their own iterations of identity politics that one favors but the other does not.
So no, I do not think that criticizing Zionism is tantamount to second-order antisemitism any more than trying to connect liberalism and its forms of identity politics is indicative of being racist or sexist or homophobic. Latching an ideology onto a demographic of people and demanding no criticism of the ideology because of it is what identity politics are all about.
"I find that hard to believe."
Fine, don't believe it. So long as you characterize Zionism as identity politics, which FAIR does not and should not, understanding about that and much else will continue to elude you.
Marx disdained civil liberties as "the rights of egoistic man" and similar in an odious tract titled "On The Jewish Question."
In that case, FAIR needs to specifically define what it means by identity politics, and then explain how Zionism deviates against it to the point that it should be heavily promoted, including the war-mongering activities of Israel and the control AIPAC has over the government. I have already explained how Zionism is textbook identity politics.
Marx never disdained civil liberties because a classless and stateless system -- which the Soviet Union most certainly was not -- would not possess the apparatus to enforce the authoritarian dictates of a few. Opposition to Zionism gaining power within a government is not the same thing as banning people following it socially on a personal level. If someone wants to promote Jewish art, that is fine, just as promoting Hindu art is fine. Or wearing traditional Jewish beanies to signify that you're of that religion. Also fine. But trying to impose Zionism or Sharia Law etc on a national level is inherently authoritarian, as is trying to ban criticism of either.
And I have already explained that you're wrong. Again, FAIR doesn't promote Zionism, "heavily" or otherwise. Yes, you could demand a full accounting of what FAIR means by "identity politics." Alternately you could form an organization of anti-identitarian socialists that would suit you better. That would suit me better as well, as I'm not much impressed with your outpouring of complaint at an organization with which you have no history and to which you've made no evident contribution.
Marx quite expressly spends a lot of "Jewish Question" mocking the "so-called rights of man." "The establishment of the political state and the dissolution of civil society into independent individuals... is accomplished by one and the same act." The stateless system was somehow going to unmake the individual so he could rejoin what Rousseau called the "larger whole." Classical liberalism rejects this, recognizing the individual as the atomic unit of politics. FAIR is a classical liberal organization.
"And I have already explained that you're wrong. Again, FAIR doesn't promote Zionism, "heavily" or otherwise."
I see otherwise. We need to bring this matter to a head with the administration, which is what these threads are gradually doing.
"Yes, you could demand a full accounting of what FAIR means by "identity politics." Alternately you could form an organization of anti-identitarian socialists that would suit you better."
So, you're saying that FAIR should have a right-wing leaning, with no socialists allowed, even though those of us on the Classical Left oppose identity politics as much as anyone associated with the Right? Most people who are not on the Mainstream Liberal Left oppose identity politics. But unfortunately, people all over the spectrum support Zionism because it has strong religious connotations with Christians with right-wing leanings.
"That would suit me better as well, as I'm not much impressed with your outpouring of complaint at an organization with which you have no history and to which you've made no evident contribution."
Translation: You disagree with what I'm saying. I get that.
As for contributions, I fight identity politics on a constant basis in my own publication on Substack and Medium, and I do so on a local level in my community. I've recently joined FAIR and I did not sign up for identity politics. People should complain no matter how long they have been in the organization. And I am making an argument that opposing the promotion of Zionism in an org against identity politics is apropos and necessary.
And Marxism is also a part of the Classical Left, albeit no specifically liberalism. They were very comfortable bedfellows until liberalism embraced capitalism starting in the 1990s.
Socialism is expressly opposed to the classical liberalism that underpins the organization. So yes, it should reject socialists, particularly socialists who want the organization's principles applied to them but won't exercise them for anyone else, socialists who think that the organization is promoting Zionism because they're not condemning it, and socialists who are so entitled that they characterize the organization as "right-wing" because a member who showed up last week wants to reorganize it to his liking and they're not falling over themselves to do so. It's not up to me, but you bring zero value to FAIR and they should treat you accordingly. Goodbye.
Again, Franklin, you continue to conflate Leninism/Stalinism/Maoism, which were statist forms of capitalism that included class rule and authoritarian governments run by an oligarchy, with the classless, bureaucratless, and moneyless system proposed by Marx and Engels. Creating a better world for the working class on both an economic front and regarding civil liberties is fully in line with classical liberalism, and an economic democracy would not have an authoritarian state. I think the major beef of liberalism is that it wants to retain capitalism, which does no favor for democracy.
There is a huge difference between an economic system and identity politics. FAIR made no statements of being against any economic system. You are trying to compare apples with oranges here. For instance, I have no problem with conservatives who espouse a continuation of some form of capitalism as part of FAIR. I knew that going in. But tolerating the promotion of Zionism, which is a form of identity politics in every sense of the word? That is a whole other ball of wax.
I saw plenty of articles already promoting Zionism, along with promotions of it in the comments. Creating articles that argue for students at universities being banned for protesting against Israel and calling them anti-semtic are most certainly doing that.
A member who showed up last week? Last week was just the first time you saw one of my comments. I've been following FAIR for about a year now and it's only in the past two months that I started seeing pro-Zionist articles. I was shocked to see it, as it was not what I signed up for. I went to a video orientation months ago and never was Zionism mentioned on it. I find that interesting.
"Reorganize" FAIR to "my liking"? How about simply demand that it sticks to its principles and stop giving a form of identity politics, one that is now being used to promote war across the world, the exceptional treatment that all forms of identity politics ask for? That's all I'm saying here.
I think, to the contrary, that I and others who are making these complaints are bringing immense value to FAIR, because they were pointing out a huge, glaring, and disturbing discrepancy to its stated principles where. I hope the administration eventually decides to deal with the problem as it should deal with it. And for the second time, you said goodbye to me, so I must say for a second time today that I'm sorry it came to this between us.