i like the way atzmon minimizes that "two palestinians" spoke out against shamir, -- then he says he knows, tho doesn't name, more palestinian shamir supporters. it's like when Engage ridicules omar barghouthi and mocks his credibility amongst palestinians, invoking instead the PLO, sari nusseibeh, and dismisses the grassroots who've called for a boycott of israel.
http://www.nigelparry.com/issues...amir/
index.html
"In April 2001 Palestinian activists Ali Abunimah and Hussein Ibish: wrote “We do not have any need for some of what Israel Shamir is introducing into the discourse on behalf of Palestinian rights, which increasingly includes elements of traditional European anti-Semitic rhetoric. Such sentiments will harm, not help, the cause. We urge all our friends in the movement for Palestinian rights to seriously consider the long-term effects this rhetoric will have on the cause, and act accordingly.”[11]"
Good morning J S Fs
ELF google is a great search engine, you should try it. http://www.gilad.co.uk/html%
20fi...ndonelders.html
However, thanks for giving this wonderful satirical piece another day of light. I am sure Greenstein, Rance, and 'Queen Maccoby' are delighted. At the end of the day, it is all about quotes with url references. No much way to hide.…
Ho shit, but what about the others? Robinson, ha ya, he is now in Engage (as far as we are aware). So he was a Zio after all. And the others? where are they. They are just gone…
At the end of the day. Atzmon was fighting for Deir Yassin Remembered. How to say it, Deir Yassin remembered is growing every year. Jpuke is a dead entity.
Re Atzmon and the SWP, a big tour of 12 concerts is taking place. This Monday (20,11)Bristol (Atzmon & Smith), 27,11 London (Galloway, Atzmon &Smith) http://www.swp.org.uk/mande.php
Are you going ro come?
As for "satirical," I think pretentious is the word you're looking for.
Anyway, I'll correct the post since you have found what I couldn't on google. You might want to consider why he hasn't indexed that particular article. It was easy enough to find when it first appeared.
He feels guilty for Israel and Zionism - found Judaism to be
guilty.
This and too many generalizations makes him appear like an
antisemite.
Teutonia - the history to this is that Atzmon has accused named Jewish anti-zionist activists as being under-cover zionists. He hasn't simply over-generalised, he has invented facts to smear active anti-zionists.
I think if he is getting a hearing its a good idea to go to where he is get up and say 'what is this shit?'. This would not be a good idea if the people who were being drawn towards his ideas were the far right. They're not though are they?
The trouble with these discussions is that no one who is influenced by him is ever going to buy the idea that what he says is unconnected to the existence of the Israel-Palestine conflict. And they're right about that. It is one of the products of that conflict.
Unfortunately a stupid one. But if there is a wider black nationalist style argument going on suspicious of older traditions (for goodness sake its not the first time this has happened) then debate that.
The depressing thing about some of the previous debates on the thread below was that it was clear to me that there were a range of people, some of them claiming actually to be from the region, who were coming from a range of different places ideologically. But how would they know the people on this site were not like Engage, given that thats what Atzmon would accuse them of being like? If one of the jobs of socialists is to explain their politics, a good job is not done by making it all about Atzmon and how he is an anti-semite just like anyone.
Thats just not true is it? The thing that really worried me is that one reason Atzmon can argue like he does is because in fact sites like this, and the Jewish Socialist tradition is today very small indeed compared to what it used to be. Many factors to this. But this need to be explained (particularly if someone really is from Lebanon, really is from the West Bank etc).
Its just deeply unhelpful to have the discussion in this form (open letters, demands that he be treated like any other anti-semite etc). Go there and point out the ridiculousness of this.
> anti-zionist activists as being under-cover zionists.
From his point of view Israel - the 'jewish state' - is crime, needs to
be 'destroyed'. So far every activist who doesn't agree with him is
an under-cover zionist.
What really worries me is, that he uses classical antisemitic stereo-
types. I'm not friend of using racism to fight another racism.
Atzmon's position isn't really a position: I think he's politically dumb, and easily led by conspiracy theories (note that his 'gatekeepers' thesis is drawn directly from 9/11 Truth). I certainly don't think we should give credibility to Atzmon's ravings, but nor do I think we should pay that much attention to them.
If he wants to play music, I have no problem. But I have serious doubts about SPSC hosting this talk.
JSG have a duty to show atzmon up for what he really is; a racist
you think it is unhelpful because it embarrasses you and the SWP with your previous support for Atzmon
firstly his background - which is as part of a far right zionist family, based largely within the israeli military. atzmon's politics today are largely a result of his reaction against this, an inversion of his previous politics (where he was brought up blaming arabs for all the ills of jews, now he blames jews for the plight of palestinians).
the context of the state of israel is important in this too. as a deeply racist, colonial settler state, it has no working class at all. consequently there are no real forces within that state for atzmon to turn to. so his stance is not dissimilar to that of white south africans who railed against the apartheid system, who also inverted their beliefs.
the upshot of this is that yes, what atzmon is coming out with has racist connotations. at the same time, it is clear that this is more an attempt he is making to resolve the issue in his own mind, than a major case of antisemitism.
and this is why i would regard the focus on atzmon as something deeply sectarian. if we are serious about challenging the real anti-semitism that exists, we should focus on the real problems, which are those fascists who would actually love to kill jews (and also kill muslims, blacks, gays, socialists etc), and the actions of the imperialists (i.e. invasions of iraq and afgahnistan by america; and the invasion of lebanon and continued occupation of palestine by israel) - these contribute to real racism directed towards jews and to be honest atzmon is a distraction from this. laying into the swp will do nothing to build anti-zionism, all it will do is split people, which plays into the hands of zionists and is a trick loved by the likes of jim (hic) denham.
and as far as i am concerned, the reason why the swp has atzmon doing gigs is because he is a great and high-profile musician who will do free gigs for an organisation that has campaigned against israel for as long as it has existed.
The idiocy of mankind's dominant types is a constantly rising factor throughout history, in these years culminating in the attempts of destruction of the entire global ecosystem, which will only be stopped by nature itself, as mankind dissappears by it's own catastrophes.
It is extremely foolish in such a situation to respond with open letters, petitions etc. I repeat. Why not attend the PSC event and call him on it. Otherwise, inevitably, and quite contrary to your wishes or indeed your beliefs, the impression will be given that you believe your organisation and political position is being oppressed by Palestinian solidarity organisations.
This is a terrible position to find oneself in, and one which should be got out of as fast as possible.
Its also true that he thinks that talking or worrying about anti-semitism at all is simply a concession to Zionism. So he is deliberately and stupidly offensive about this. The two things are linked. And they appeal because of the way in which the behaviour of the Israeli state is increasingly utilizing a politics of ethnic hatred in its brutal campaign against the Palestinian people.
At some level most people on this site recognise these things. By all means abuse Atzmon. By all means strongly voice your disagreements with the SWP. But do not argue as if this is a sign of a 'toleration' for anti-semitism on the left or in the Palestinian movement. Its really silly. Sorry. That will make people angry I know.
But one thing I notice about this argument. Since Abram Leon an important component of arguments against Zionists has been to challenge the idea that modern anti-semitism is some eternal ideology inherent in non-Jews. Its a specific ideology linked to specific power relations in a specific kind of society.
The content of a Polish peasent revolt in the 17th century is not the same as the content of a member of the black hundreds spewing his filth in late 19th century Russia. Its even true that when Marx wrote 'The Jewish Question' no anti-semitic stereotypes of Jews controlling international finance existed (one of the really odd things, as Arendt was to point out, was that the undeveloped nature of international finance at the time meant it was probably truer then, then it was in the era when such stereotypes developed).
To compare bitterness from Palestinians about the current setup, and the things that feed into this with classical anti-semitism is simply not to understand what it was. Its not a particular arrangement of words. Its a system of oppression and discrimination which was in its time much more serious even then the kind of racism we see today being directed against people who are classed as Muslims by the State, what they actually believe often being irrelevent.
Its wrong to compare this with a sectarian fight about the relationship between Jewish groups and elements around Palestinian campaigns, even if in this case, the proponent unfortunately combines unattractive offensiveness with brilliant musical ability. Its just not in the same ball park.
And hard as it is this has to be explained to people. There ain't no chance of mutual co-existence if this kind of thing is compared to fascist anti-semitism. And often misdirected bitterness and anger will continue as long as the conflict continues. You can't demand of organisations that they exclude misdirected bitterness and anger from their meetings. You go to the meetings and argue against it.
Thats what Socialists have to do.
he is a bourgeois dilettante taking a classically anti-semitic position - argued by figures linked to neo-nazi movements such as shamir, eisen etc - into the palestinian solidarity camp, for reasons of self-promotion, with potentially disasterous consequences.
atzmon's gambit that zionism is the highest expression of 'jewishness' and therefore cannot be opposed without first opposing 'the jews' has implications. It
1) divides the palestinan solidarity movement by excluding jews
2) diverts activists into a blind alley of jew hunting instead of building solidarity with the palestinians.
3) provides an open goal on a plate for any zionist who wishes to discredit the solidarity movement.
4) makes the holocaust denial and the anti-jewish racism of the zundels et al respectable...
there are plenty more reasons your group should not be promoting him but it already seems silly to be having this debate with someone who should know better.
However, the oppression factor is less important (in terms of organisation and progressive advance) than the question of the whether you can tackle racism (and oppression/imperialism/colonialism et al) by allowing for, making concessions to racism. The answer is you can't and never will.
I can't imagine what it would take Atzmon to say for John G, Martin Smith, George Galloway and other SWP/Respect people to say - this guy is beyond the pale. Please enlighten us.
As for the suggestion to debate with Atzmon rather than just condemn him - you can only have a worthwhile conversation if you have some common ground to start with. Where is that common ground with someone like Atzmon?
Seeing that Weyman Bennett is now happy to sit down with Nick Griffin I hope we are not entering a phase of debating with racists/antisemites/fascists.
The left don't need Atzmon's ideas, the Palestinians don't need Atzmon's ideas, but I can think of one group that they help...
I'd have a punt that because they got jumped all over for having anything to do with Atzmon - whereas the pro-war, pro-Israel mob can have all sorts of dubious connections without any such thing occurring - they just stuck their heels in and said "we're not being intimidated". I can see their point. When you're on the Left you're always being asked to condemn this, distance yourself from that, have nothing to do with the other. No matter what you do and no matter who you work with. All this by people whose political representatives have filthy dirty hands but who are never asked to do so much as clean their fingernails. I can understand it.
But that said, there surely has to be a time when you have to know to give it a rest even though you're going to get a slagging for it. It has to be possible to quietly retreat and say "yeah, we changed our mind". And this is surely one of those times, is it not?
There were members of the SWP who opposed his appearances at Marxism 2005 and Bookmarks but they were ignored and even lied to by the leadership. Atzmon was given space in Socialist Worker to denounce Tony Greenstein, Roland Rance and Deborah Maccoby. The leadership dug in on its support for Atzmon and the grass roots members who opposed it buckled though I am sure some people have left and will continue to do so as a result of this.
And all the while these three stooges, Atzmon, Shamir and Eisen, gain footholds in a movement that is nothing if it isn't against all forms of racism.
The only pleasure I have got from this is Atzmon or his wife threatening that he will sue for being called racist when he dare do no such thing.
"Weyman Bennett is now happy to sit down with Nick Griffin"
any evidence of this?
"I turned on radio 4 last Wednesday and found myself listening to the BNP's Nick Griffin being called as a "witness" on the Moral Maze, talking about freedom of speech! Normally Steven Rose is on the programme of course, but I was relieved to find he wasn't this week, and when I asked him he confirmed that he had refused to take part with Griffin on the show. Unfortunately Weyman Bennet of UAF WAS taking part, for reasons best known to himself or his organisation(s)."
The BNP site is boasting about how Griffin dealt wth the liberal-left on the show. On the moral maze site itself, I can only pick up stuff about this week's show. may be soemone else can confirm this.
Of course the BBC are more guilty here as they could have easily run an adversarial debate about this issue without inviting Griffin. Whether they would have persisted with inviting him if every significant anti-racist they approached refused is another matter. And that's why I think Weyman was wrong.
I didn't hear the programme so I can't judge how effective Weyman was. What I do know is that the ultra right Stormfront website - which is often critical of Griffin for being soft (!) was gushing with praise for how he dealt with Weyman.
But to get back to the main point, it has been put to me by SWP members that even if Atzmon says antisemtic things we should debate with him.
If he was a teenager coming to these issues for the first time or soembody quite naieve I could see that, but he is no teenager. He is a recidivist who thinks that by putting his views in harrsher and more controversial form he is being more "radical". He's not he's just making an arse of himself and those that follow him like sheep. And he's spreading poison.
He obviously has the odd moment of contrition (or sense of self-preservation) ,which I guess is why he has changed the word "Jews" to "Zionists" in some places on his 2003 essay on antisemitism. Given the thrust of the argument that remains, this is a minor cosmetic change.
To me he still seems to me to be marching on the path that Israel Shamir and Paul Eisen have gone along that leads to the likes of Zundel, Holocaust denial, rehabilitation of Hitler, world Jewish conspiracy etc.
I don't think that serious anti-zionists should be wastng their time trying to save him and they certanly shouldn't be promoting him.
Commenting by HaloScan
