The Muslims are split down Sunni/Shi’ite lines. The Christians are split down Catholic/Protestant/5th column lines. The Jews outdo them both in their over-fragmentation.
Thus, when a sizeable slice of western opinion traces the troubles of the world to the Jews, it’s not entirely wrong. One fragment of Jewry is certainly in on the destruction, e.g. the Rothschilds.
Recently I ran a post on this and Methodius quotes Vivificat!: When Anti-Zionism Turns Into Anti-Semitism:
I start with a statement that many will find counterintuitive and is this: since Zionism is a non-religious political movement belonging to the sphere of politics according to its own founders, to oppose Zionism a priori does not make one a Judaeophobe and anti-Semite of necessity.
Said in other words, in theory, it is possible to be an anti-Zionist without hating Jews as a people or as believers of their particular religion and at the same time, there is no obstacle in principle impeding an otherwise tolerant state to oppose Zionism and to protect the civil liberties of the Jewish people in their midst.
Methodius puts his Orthodox slant on it:
I believe that those who make propaganda for the government of the state of Israel have been twisting the meanings of words.
But that is what all warmongers do. Criticism of the Israeli bombing of Lebanon in 2006 have been described as “antisemitic” (on the grounds that “anti-Zionism is anti semitism”), just as critics of the US bombing of Iraq in 2003 and of Yugoslavia in 1999 have been described as “anti-American”.
The Israel apologists also accuse those who criticise any policy of the government of the state of Israel of denying Israel the right to exist, as if the right to commit mayhem is an essential part of the right to exist.
Those who read this blog feel it is pro-Israeli or as Pisces said “Israeli blogspace”. That’s actually wrong – it is small “c” conservative libertarian blogspace and other issues fit in around that. Methodius is not wrong in condemning the OTT aggression of Israel but as usual with detractors, he only gives half the picture.
He doesn’t show the continued atrocity of the Arab nations, incessantly trying to wipe a sovereign nation off the map and not being particular how they do it. He never mentions the human shields in Gaza and I read no word about rockets. The only people who mention rockets are the Israelis and non-Israelis who see the iniquity of the daily rocket barrages, utterly uncondemned by the UN.
When one says the Jews did this or that, the question is, “Which Jews?” Haaretz are running an article called A Special Place in Hell: Dovish Jews – Excommunicate Them. Here’s a sampler:
The opening shot was fired this month by the former chairman of the Governing Board of the World Jewish Congress, Isi Liebler, who declared it “our obligation to confront the enemy within – renegade Jews – including Israelis who stand at the vanguard of global efforts to demonize and delegitimize the Jewish state.”
“Such odious Jews can be traced back to apostates during the Middle Ages who fabricated blood libels and vile distortions of Jewish religious practice for Christian anti-Semites to incite hatred which culminated in massacres,” Liebler wrote in the Jerusalem Post. “It was in response to these renegades that the herem [excommunication] was introduced.”
That’s heavy stuff and there’s more:
Among these counterparts, it develops, is J Street, the new dovish lobbying organization which describes itself as pro-Israel and pro-peace. Writing ahead of J Street’s first annual national conference, which begins on Sunday in Washington, Liebler argued that although J Street and other U.S. Jewish groups critical of Israel may describe themselves as Zionist, “their prime objective is to pressure the U.S. government to use ‘tough love’ against Israel – a euphemism for demanding that the Jewish state make further unilateral concessions to neighbors pledged to its annihilation.”
That’s not unlike those Tories at the conference describing UKIP and LPUK as “loonies”, whereas they’re all thereabouts in terms of free market, small government stances plus getting out of Europe. It’s a most divisive position to take.
Even among the Israeli hawks, is a divide – those of them, the obscenely rich underground Churchill referred to who will sell Israel down the drain when the time is ripe – the anti Jewish Jews who feature so much in the Protocols, in the Council of 300 and so on … as against the hawks who see their nation facing annihilation and are not willing to compromise for that reason.
Then there is the Kabbalist and the Khassidic Jew after that. Then there is the average Israeli citizen, with no great religious fervour but looking after family and job, just as we are over here. And all these competing fragments of Jewry, including the relativistic, equivalent American diaspora who “think PC” and want everyone to love one another, they’re the ones the Haaretz article was railing against, the same PC leftists I rail against – these all have a different vision of Zion and of Israel.
IMHO, those who genuinely love their land of Israel and are as hawkish about it as I’d be about preserving my own nation’s heritage and sovereignty, logically would get my support, just as an Iranian patriot would have my support for wanting to see his own heritage preserved and his own nation great. Stands to reason.
Turning to our politics again, Andrew Allison is a Tory but I’ve seen him giving hell to the Tory leadership on various issues. That’s what one does when one wants the best for one’s party and one’s nation. Criticism is not disloyalty and thus the type of Israeli hawk who condemns criticism out of hand is out of order.
On the other hand, he has a point in that people, especially some American Jewish lobbies like J Street are so relativistic that they are playing into the hands of the genuine enemies of Israel and of Jewry in general. Beware any sort of Obamaesque equivalence in supposedly pro-Jewish movements, especially those which appear to be particularly well funded.
And so it goes on and on, this argument.