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 pol…
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.
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.