Liberal fascism
It's about
...the now common analogy that is drawn between Israel and the Nazis, or Gaza and the Warsaw Ghetto, as used by such Israel-haters...It is used for very specific political purposes. Since Nazism is totally beyond the pale – and since the Israel-haters believe, falsely, that Israel’s legitimacy rests upon the Holocaust – tarring it as a Nazi state delegitimises it and thus advances the agenda of its destruction.
...I would also make a further point that Rich does not make. Calling Israel a Nazi state retrospectively sanitises the Holocaust and lets complicit Europe off the hook – Britain too. After all, Britain was partly responsible for the murder of thousands of Jews to whom it refused entry to Palestine -- in order to appease the Arabs of Palestine who were in league with the Nazis – and who perished in the Holocaust as a result. If the Jews have become Nazis, then their victimisation at the hands of the Nazis stops being the crime of crimes.
It also allows people safely to hate the Jews once again...
Read it all.
Posts
13 comments:
I agree that these anti-Israel, pro-Hamas protests are not justifiable criticisms. They are actually anti-semitic demonstrations.
I read the article. Parts of it were difficult. Even though I am a "knuckle dragging right winger", and a Christian, I think that Israel is correct in its treatment of Hamas. Israel is defending itself against an enemy who has openly stated time and again that Israel does not have the right to exist. Israel does have the right to exist and it should have the right to defend itself against attack.
Liberal Fascism has a somewhat different meaning to me. Its a liberal idea that theirs is not only the best way, but the only way for government to progress. A 1984, Orwellian, big brother state with them at the helm. Theirs is a dark, flat, twilight zone of zombies wondering around waiting for government to show the way. Sad!!!
Here, pictures speak louder than any words
http://www.normanfinkelstein.com/article.php?pg=11&ar=2510
Paula,
The comparison is very much evident from the pictures, as well as from statistics and from the news. It is only different in its details.
I think we need a new term for you guys. "Palestinians genocide deniers"?
"Israel is only responding in self defense against the unceasing rocket fire from Gaza and the looming threat from Syria and Iran."
"The war that was forced upon us" or "if Jewry should plot another world war in order to exterminate the Aryan peoples of Europe, it would not be the Aryan peoples which would be exterminated, but Jewry". Guess who?
The rethoric that is hard for some to take seriosly, serves for others as a source to feed their egos. It's absolutely essential for them to keep Holocaust and anti-semitism alive, otherwise how can they play their role of a victim?
So, Galia, we're "playing" at being victim?
Here's a report from four years ago
Here's another from two years ago
and here from last March
And there is discrimination and racism based on skin color, race, religion etc etc. It's not solely aimed at Jews, so don't make it look like you have monopoly on being discriminated and mistreated.
BTW, do you consider yourself islamophobic?
No, I am not islamophobic.
I am wary of fanaticism, extremism and political violence that seem to be based on religious teachings rather than what people do that could be wrong and unjust.
I am also wary of people who quote ridiculous biased sources top rationalize their dislikes.
"No, I am not islamophobic"
I didn't know i was anti-Semite, but according to some definitions I am since i did participate in anti Israeli protests and see a similarity b/w Warsaw and Gaza.
"I am wary of fanaticism, extremism and political violence that seem to be based on religious teachings"
Any particular reason you choose Islam ? Correct me if i am wrong, but i don't recall you being wary of any violence based on teachings of Christianity, Judaism, Buddhism or any other religion other than Islam.
Gali, Larry Derfner is an out-and-out Leftist and I have had run-ins with him previously. He doesn't always have command of facts in addition to his radical opinions.
So? Just because he is Leftist and you are Rightist, doesn't make one right or wrong. You may disagree with him, you may see things differently, but again it does not necessary makes him wrong. If he "doesn't always have command of facts" then you should point it out and cite your source, but as far as "radical opinion", first, that's your perception of his opinion, and second, radical is not necessary and not always a bad thing, is it? I think he makes some valid points.
Gali, you missed my last point. He fools around with facts.
No, i didn't. "If he "doesn't always have command of facts" then you should point it out and cite your source" Where was he wrong?
Post a Comment