Monday, May 17, 2010

Chomping Chomsky

In the headline above, it's Chomsky who is doing the chomping.

His entrance into Judea and Samaria banned, the Lede Blog of the NYTimes carried this bit of information:

In an interview with Deborah Solomon of The New York Times Magazine in 2003, Mr. Chomsky said, “I objected to the founding of Israel as a Jewish state. I don’t think a Jewish or Christian or Islamic state is a proper concept. I would object to the United States as a Christian state.” When Ms. Solomon pressed Mr. Chomsky on his opposition to Israel, saying, “Your father was a respected Hebraic scholar, and sometimes you sound like a self-hating Jew,” he replied:

It is a shame that critics of Israeli policies are seen as either anti-Semites or self-hating Jews. It’s grotesque. If an Italian criticized Italian policies, would he be seen as a self-hating Italian?


Even me, not really a world-class philosopher can see a fault in Chomsky's logic. If an Italian denied the existence of Italy, or its right to be established as a political framework for the Italian people (who could be of all religions), yes, he would be a self-hating Italian - just like Chomsky who objects to Israel's very founding is a self-hating Jew.


_ _ _

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

don't forget chomsky's repeated lies over the years about his own political background, telling one thing to the Mapam-oriented Israel Horizons and another to Ved Mehta for a New Yorker profile. Then he supported Faurisson the Holocaust-denier and the Cambodian mass murder. Here he plays a trick making the Jews out to be only a religious group, which he knows is false. He pretends to oppose Israel as a religious state on those false grounds, but we know that every Arab state but Lebanon is a Muslim state, as well as an Arab ethnic state. chomsky never complains about saudi arabia's religious character.


bir zeit university where noam was going to speak was founded as a school by an Arab Christian converted from the Greek Orthodox church to the Anglican church. Hence, a good chomskian or edward saidian ought to consider bir zeit a colonialist-imperialist enterprise. How could our loyal anti-imperialist chomsky speak at such a morally corrupt institution??

E

Anonymous said...

Said himself was a convert to Protestantism, or his family was. No one, not even the Sunnis, were behind Arab nationalism like the Greek Orthodox; for example, Michel 'Aflaq was Greek Orthodox. By and large, the Levantine Christians who are against Arabism are the Maronites, which is not to say they are all necessarily philo-Semitic.