5 ms·

Even though they take their views to ridiculous extremes, sites like Stormfront do have a valid critique of the hypocrisy of liberal American Jews. Exactly the

Even though they take their views to ridiculous extremes, sites like Stormfront do have a valid critique of the hypocrisy of liberal American Jews. Exactly the same people and groups who claim that White people desiring to live among other White people is stupid and immoral, also believe that Israel being a Jewish nation is non-negotiable. Only the far-left (e.g. Norman Finkelstein and Chomsky in some moments) are consistent in criticizing Jewish identity and White identity in the same terms. The mainstream claim that these two concepts are completely distinct and incomparable, and yet there is no obvious difference. The only way that this discrepancy can be seen as something other than hypocrisy, is if either (1) Jewish identity is entirely defensive, i.e. a reaction to prejudice from the society in which Jews happen to live, or (2) Jewishness is an entirely separate category, incomparable to race or ethnicity (I don't include religion because I don't think that the concept of Jewish identity solely as a religious identity stands up to scrutiny). In response to (1), I don't see this as the full picture as Jewishness is allowed to be celebrated in its own right. The idea that Israel should be Jewish merely for the physical protection of Jews, rather than the protection of Jewish identity, is not consistent with how Israelis or their liberal supporters describe Israel. In response to (2), the only way that Jewishness can be rendered incomparable to Whiteness, is to accept that the most extreme views against Whites are true. Namely that (unlike every other cultural or ethnic identity), Whiteness is an identity of racial supremacism and oppresion. Some people (again, on the far left) truly believe this. But I find it a ridiculous assertion, and most people simply are too brow-beaten to dig this deep in to anti-racist discourse.

morgante 12y ago
> sites like Stormfront do have a valid critique of the hypocrisy of liberal American Jews. No, they don't. Don't legitimize their nonsense. Also, Israel is not meant to be solely Jewish. It's just majority Jewish, just like other nations are majority Christian/white. That's a security measure, not an expression that Jews are inherently superior to other races—most Jews I know (including Israelis) support the inclusion of other people in their communities. Please don't bring Stormfront to HN.
- QuantumChaos 12y ago
  >No, they don't. Don't legitimize their nonsense. I share this critique, and I outlined it in my post, so I'm not legitimizing them, but rather outlining what things I think they are correct about. I simply do not believe that Israel as a Jewish state is a "security measure". Almost no one thinks of it in these terms, neither Israeli Jews or American Jews (Einstein did, but he was in a minority). Israeli's (and American Jews) typcially describe Israel is existing for the protection of Israel identity, religion and culture, not the physical protection of individual Jews. You say that most Jews support the inclusion of other people in their communities, and yet the Prime Minister of Israel said "If we don't stop their [African asylum seekers] entry, the problem that currently stands at 60,000 could grow to 600,000, and that threatens our existence as a Jewish and democratic state ... This phenomenon is very grave and threatens the social fabric of society, our national security and our national identity." >Please don't bring Stormfront to HN. I will bring my own beliefs to HN, feel free to deal with it however you like. [1] http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/may/20/israel-netanyahu-african-immigrants-jewish http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/may/20/israel-netanyah...
  - morgante 12y ago
    > Almost no one thinks of it in these terms, neither Israeli Jews or American Jews (Einstein did, but he was in a minority). Israeli's (and American Jews) typcially describe Israel is existing for the protection of Israel identity, religion and culture, not the physical protection of individual Jews. I'm an American Jew who does. It's also not all that rare of a belief that having a country with a majority Jewish population is essential to the protection of the Jewish people. While people certainly talk about this argument less these days, it was one of the key justifications for the creation of Israel in the wake of the Holocaust (what you get as a small minority in every nation on Earth).
    - QuantumChaos 12y ago
      I'm familiar with holocaust as a reason for Israel's existence, I just don't accept it as the primary reason. There are simply to many occasions where American Jews and Israelis celebrate Jewish culture and identity for its own sake, and not merely as a reaction to being singled out by other Whites. Even the narrative of the holocaust suggests that Jewish identity and culture is valued for its own sake. The concept of genocide implies that wiping an entire group of people is worse than simply killing the same number of randomly selected people. If this is true, then it follows that there was some inherent value in that group's identity, beyond their worth, and right to exist, as individuals.
philwelch 12y ago
"White identity" is a historically incoherent concept advanced almost exclusively by neo-Nazis. "Whites" are descended from an entire continent of rival nations, all of whom historically hate each other. A better analogy would be, I dunno, Croats? No one begrudges the Croats their national identity.
- QuantumChaos 12y ago
  First, people certainly will begrudge Croats their national identity, when they get around to it. I'm sure you're familiar with the battle against English identity or Swedish identity (at least when they are defined in the same way as Jewish identity is). Furthermore, I think that you are simply defining anyone who talks or thinks about White identity as a "neo-Nazi". Jews are given space where they can think about and consider their identity. Whites are only permitted to feel shame about theirs. The onus is on you to explain why people with common appearance, ethnic background, language and culture, do not form a well defined group simply because they are more numerous than Jewish people are as a group. Or why, the European disapora, having intermingled in the US for 500 years, must completely give up their identity and accept anyone from the world as like them, simply because they don't originate from a single country.
  - philwelch 12y ago
    European-descended people as a whole don't have a common ethnicity, language, or culture.
    - QuantumChaos 12y ago
      They certainly have much more in common in all these areas than they do with non-Europeans.
      - philwelch 12y ago
        "Certainly"? I don't think that's the case. Can you expand on what you think I'm missing? There are countries outside of Europe--entire continents, really-- that speak a European languages. Do you really think Chileans have less in common with Spaniards than Lithuanians? I'd even guess that African-Americans and white Americans are more similar than white Americans and Danes in terms of language and culture.

morgante 12y ago

> sites like Stormfront do have a valid critique of the hypocrisy of liberal American Jews. No, they don't. Don't legitimize their nonsense. Also, Israel is not meant to be solely Jewish. It's just majority Jewish, just like other nations are majority Christian/white. That's a security measure, not an expression that Jews are inherently superior to other races—most Jews I know (including Israelis) support the inclusion of other people in their communities. Please don't bring Stormfront to HN.

QuantumChaos 12y ago
>No, they don't. Don't legitimize their nonsense. I share this critique, and I outlined it in my post, so I'm not legitimizing them, but rather outlining what things I think they are correct about. I simply do not believe that Israel as a Jewish state is a "security measure". Almost no one thinks of it in these terms, neither Israeli Jews or American Jews (Einstein did, but he was in a minority). Israeli's (and American Jews) typcially describe Israel is existing for the protection of Israel identity, religion and culture, not the physical protection of individual Jews. You say that most Jews support the inclusion of other people in their communities, and yet the Prime Minister of Israel said "If we don't stop their [African asylum seekers] entry, the problem that currently stands at 60,000 could grow to 600,000, and that threatens our existence as a Jewish and democratic state ... This phenomenon is very grave and threatens the social fabric of society, our national security and our national identity." >Please don't bring Stormfront to HN. I will bring my own beliefs to HN, feel free to deal with it however you like. [1] http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/may/20/israel-netanyahu-african-immigrants-jewish http://www.theguardian.com/world/2012/may/20/israel-netanyah...
- morgante 12y ago
  > Almost no one thinks of it in these terms, neither Israeli Jews or American Jews (Einstein did, but he was in a minority). Israeli's (and American Jews) typcially describe Israel is existing for the protection of Israel identity, religion and culture, not the physical protection of individual Jews. I'm an American Jew who does. It's also not all that rare of a belief that having a country with a majority Jewish population is essential to the protection of the Jewish people. While people certainly talk about this argument less these days, it was one of the key justifications for the creation of Israel in the wake of the Holocaust (what you get as a small minority in every nation on Earth).
  - QuantumChaos 12y ago
    I'm familiar with holocaust as a reason for Israel's existence, I just don't accept it as the primary reason. There are simply to many occasions where American Jews and Israelis celebrate Jewish culture and identity for its own sake, and not merely as a reaction to being singled out by other Whites. Even the narrative of the holocaust suggests that Jewish identity and culture is valued for its own sake. The concept of genocide implies that wiping an entire group of people is worse than simply killing the same number of randomly selected people. If this is true, then it follows that there was some inherent value in that group's identity, beyond their worth, and right to exist, as individuals.

philwelch 12y ago

"White identity" is a historically incoherent concept advanced almost exclusively by neo-Nazis. "Whites" are descended from an entire continent of rival nations, all of whom historically hate each other. A better analogy would be, I dunno, Croats? No one begrudges the Croats their national identity.

QuantumChaos 12y ago
First, people certainly will begrudge Croats their national identity, when they get around to it. I'm sure you're familiar with the battle against English identity or Swedish identity (at least when they are defined in the same way as Jewish identity is). Furthermore, I think that you are simply defining anyone who talks or thinks about White identity as a "neo-Nazi". Jews are given space where they can think about and consider their identity. Whites are only permitted to feel shame about theirs. The onus is on you to explain why people with common appearance, ethnic background, language and culture, do not form a well defined group simply because they are more numerous than Jewish people are as a group. Or why, the European disapora, having intermingled in the US for 500 years, must completely give up their identity and accept anyone from the world as like them, simply because they don't originate from a single country.
- philwelch 12y ago
  European-descended people as a whole don't have a common ethnicity, language, or culture.
  - QuantumChaos 12y ago
    They certainly have much more in common in all these areas than they do with non-Europeans.
    - philwelch 12y ago
      "Certainly"? I don't think that's the case. Can you expand on what you think I'm missing? There are countries outside of Europe--entire continents, really-- that speak a European languages. Do you really think Chileans have less in common with Spaniards than Lithuanians? I'd even guess that African-Americans and white Americans are more similar than white Americans and Danes in terms of language and culture.