Showing posts with label victimhood. Show all posts
Showing posts with label victimhood. Show all posts

Friday, May 05, 2023

On Thursday, Mahmoud Abbas convened a meeting of the PLO Executive Committee.

Besides his normal anti-Israel pronouncements, he called for the widest possible participation in Nakba Day activities, stressing to his people their right to "return" to an apartheid state rather than live under his rule. 

The "widest participation" line is funny, because the PLO Executive Committee is entirely made up of older light-skinned men.


The youngest member, as far as I can tell, is 55 years old. All the rest are over 60, and most are in their 70s.

So a uniformly old white and male committee is telling all Palestinians what they should do.

As usual, the Palestinian "victimhood" status serves to negate their crimes against progressivism.




Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Thursday, March 16, 2023

Today is the 20th anniversary of Rachel Corrie's death, accidentally killed by an Israeli bulldozer as she acted as a human shield against a mine clearing operation.

Her death came directly because of the Leftist myth that Israelis are racist - and that Palestinians aren't.

Corrie was brainwashed by her "progressive" teachers at Evergreen College and her International Solidarity Movement colleagues. 

One of her instructors, Simona Sharoni,  not only encourages but requires students to engage in activism in her classes. Corrie received college credit for her trip to Gaza, working with her professors to call her activism an independent study program

A basic tenet of the far-Left, which has now become mainstream, is that Israel is an irredeemably racist entity engaged in "genocide" against non-white Palestinians. This myth is what fueled Corrie and ISM to place activists in harm's way, because of a naïve belief that they were invincible - protected by their "white privilege."

One of Corrie's fellow Evergreen students, Joe Smith, also received independent study credit for his time in Rafah while Corrie was there. "I saw ISM as a way that I could directly use my white, Western, American male privilege to directly serve underprivileged people of color," he said a week after her death.

Corrie's emails to her parents while in Gaza emphasized her unwavering beliefs that white privilege would protect her, and that her anti-Israel activism was penance for her being an American. She emailed that Israel wouldn't arrest her and hold her for a long time because "I am a white US citizen." She wrote about how ISM members could make "serious use of our international white person privilege," and said, "If the Israeli military should break with their racist tendency not to injure white people, please pin the reason squarely on the fact that I am in the midst of a genocide which I am also indirectly supporting, and for which my government is largely responsible."

Other ISM activists admitted after Corrie's death that they felt invincible. ISM believed that "the white foreigners were the magic bullet that could neutralize Israel's overwhelming military strength." Smith himself admitted how he and his fellow ISMers felt invincible by their whiteness: "It's definitely easy to get cocky in this war zone when a tank is shooting at people and you walk up to them and shout at them, 'Hey, I'm here!' and they pack up and leave. You get so used to this idea, 'Hey, they won't hurt us.' It has really made me realize how naïve and cocky I was."

Corrie and other ISMers took huge risks with their lives because of this child-like belief that their whiteness is a superpower. In fact, an Irish activist in Rafah at the time named Jenny was nearly run down herself by a D9 that she thought she could stop. “The bulldozer’s coming, the earth is burying my feet, my legs, I’ve got nowhere to run, and I thought, ‘This is out of control.' Another activist pulled me up and out of the way at the last minute.” 

Even the Palestinians that these activists befriended considered them crazy. But there were no adults around to counteract the almost religious belief they had that Israeli racism would protect them in a war zone.

Notably, ISM would specifically recruit white kids because of this very assumption. Activists were well aware (and struggled with the idea) that they were promoting the idea of being white saviors of darker Palestinians and complicit in the racism they claim to oppose. 

But there was another reason why Corrie took such a risk that day that she was killed. And that was Palestinian racism and misogyny.

Even though these woke, white ISM activists flocked to Rafah to supposedly help Palestinians, there was much mistrust among the oppressed people of color that they deigned to help. ISM members were very concerned over an anonymous letter they had received:

[Corrie] was propelled, in part, by frustration. During the past few days she and the nine other ISM activists had become preoccupied with an anonymous letter circulating through Rafah that cast suspicion on the human shields. “Who are they? Why are they here? Who asked them to come here?” it asked. The letter referred to Corrie and the other expatriate women in Rafah as “nasty foreign bitches” whom “our Palestinian young men are following around.” 

That morning [of Corrie's death], the ISM team tried to devise a strategy to counteract the letter’s effects. “We all had a feeling that our role was too passive. We talked about how to engage the Israeli military,” Richard “Fuzz” Purssell told me by phone from Great Britain. 
Corrie, while assuming that Israeli racism would protect her, felt that if she would only take more risks, then Palestinian racism and misogyny would magically disappear. 

And that is exactly what she did.

We know now that Palestinians have treated these white international women horribly. There are many reports of how they have been raped by the Palestinians they think they are helping - and the stories are hushed up by the very organizations like ISM they volunteer for. Corrie believed that Palestinians are inherently good and Israeli Jews inherently evil, and she only had to try a little harder to prove it. 

The narrative of Israeli racism and Palestinian victimhood is fundamental to the existence of these organizations like ISM. And that false narrative is not only what killed Rachel Corrie, but also promoted a culture of Palestinian sexual assaults on her fellow, invincible, white women. 






Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Tuesday, March 14, 2023




Palestinians cannot stand not being the biggest victims in history. 

Rasha Abdullah Salameh, a Jordanian of Palestinian descent, describes her anger at visiting a Holocaust museum in Skokie, IL.

I was walking in the heavy autumn rain in the US state of Illinois, in the year 2017, heading towards the Skokie area specifically. ; to visit the “Holocaust” museum; To get acquainted with the way in which the oppressor presents, currently, his old grievance.

My fury was growing every minute; It is not only grief over a human tragedy that a normal sane person would not accept, but also anger at the concealment of the second part of the story. The Jews in charge of the museum, which was established in 2009, do not mention that they emerged from their darkness, thirsting for blood, and inflicting more than the Holocaust, suffocation in gas chambers, and execution by firing squad, on the Palestinians, until this moment, and with the most horrible means that can be imagined as well, of harassment, usurpation of rights, falsification of history, and the enjoyment of sniping the lives of unarmed civilians and fedayeen defending their land.

I was also furious at the absence of the Palestinian narrative on the world stage. I was walking around the museum at the time, wondering why the Palestinians did not establish international museums that matched in the power of their narration and the ingenuity of narration tools what the Jews erected in several international cities, under the name of “Holocaust” museums.

The ornate Jewish tales have been greatly exaggerated. They claim a number of victims exceeding 6 million Jews, with an almost complete absence of historical sources on which it was relied upon, and with an absolute absence of the complementary narrative, which is the occupation of Palestine, the displacement of its people, the massacres of its inhabitants, and the infliction of torture on them that exceeds what the Nazis did.
I've noted before about how while Israelis and Jews usually try to look at things from others' perspectives, and often empathize with their enemies, but Palestinians (and most Arabs) simply cannot do that. Anything that humanizes Jews, anything that can cause sympathy for Jews in ay way, must be strenuously opposed. Jews must be demonized, dehumanized, and framed as the ultimate evil. 

In 2010, Brookings had a poll of Arabs that asked about whether they ever empathize with Jews or Israeli victims of terror. The results were - hardly ever.








Normal humans have empathy.  Palestinians simply do not have that ability. 





Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Thursday, February 09, 2023

In December, the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research and Tel Aviv University carried out a joint opinion survey of Palestinians and Israelis, asking them similar questions to compare their opinions. 

These joint polls have been happening for years, and they are very valuable in comparing both sides' opinions of the peace process or a two state solution.

There were two questions asked, though, which were not well thought out. The responses are far more significant than they appear at first blush.

The pair of questions were prefaced with, "To what extent do you disagree or agree with the following statements regarding the experiences of Jews /Palestinians generally?" with the wording of "Jews" given to Israelis and "Palestinians" to Palestinian Arabs.

The first statement was, "I believe that the suffering of Palestinians/Jews is unique throughout the human history." 

This question implies an equivalence between the Jewish people who have existed for over 3500 years and a Palestinian people who have existed as a self-defined people for, at the very most, a century. If the question was meant to show equivalence, it should have used "Israelis" instead of "Jews."

The answers:


More Palestinians than Israeli Jews think that their suffering is unique throughout human history! Given that Jewish history includes centuries of pogroms, Crusades, expulsions, forced conversions, massacres and a Holocaust, this Palestinian mindset is astonishing both in its unparalleled hubris and in its ignorance of world history. 

It is impossible to make peace with people who are so detached from reality, and so wedded to the myth that their victimhood trumps all others since the dawn of time.

The next statement: "Since Palestinians/Jews are the victims of ongoing suffering, it is their moral right to do anything in order to survive."

The answers:


It is a poorly written statement for comparison purposes, because each side is likely to interpret it differently.

The statement did not define the parameters of "anything." Almost certainly, if the question had the words "including genocide" or "including blowing up babies" the percentage of Israeli Jews who agreed would have shrunk significantly. 

I'm not so certain if the same could be said about Palestinians. After all, they are taught that killing Israeli Jewish civilians is not only moral, but a legal right of "resistance" under international law, and they overwhelmingly support terror attacks against innocent Jews while the number of Israelis who support murdering Palestinian civilians is quite small. 

The Israeli Jews almost certainly didn't have an expansive interpretation of what "anything" means.  The Palestinians almost certainly did. Even so, far more Palestinians - nine out of ten! - say that anything is justified for their cause.

This poll shows a Palestinian people who are unhinged from both reality and morality.  







Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Thursday, February 02, 2023

This is a Twitter thread from author and researcher Hussein Aboubakr Mansour that is a good follow-up to my earlier post on liberal Palestinians supporting terror.

__________________________________________

Underneath the positions of pro-Palestinian progressive Westerners lies a conglomerate of presuppositions and assumptions that are rarely openly discussed or mentioned. 

One of such major presuppositions is that Palestinian terrorism, the indiscriminate murderous violence 
targeting mostly defenseless Jewish civilians, is a core part of the Palestinian identity and a normative Palestinian behavior to be expected. As such, this behavior can not be blamed on Palestinian society or institutions but on Israel and Israeli action, which controls the structure of power from which the Palestinian identity emerged.

 In this position, highly intelligent people discover the most troubling aspect of the conflict but only to dismiss it. This form of humanistic bigotry against the Palestinians came to justify their worst inclination and disregard the lives of Israeli Jews, ending up being one of the most dehumanizing positions towards Israelis and Palestinians. 

This position is not new but has become a core intellectual habit of the international left since the canonization of the works of 
Frantz Fanon as a Bible of decolonization. According to Fanon, the murderous rampage of the colonized man against the colonizer is the quintessential act of self-liberation. The blaze of wrath and anger that ends in murder is nothing but the birth pains of freedom. In other words, the struggle, no matter how violent or extreme, is an existential condition and an ontological urgency. 

These ideas, which started in the circles of the French Left in the 1950s to justify Algerian acts of extreme violence against the French colony, became a solid part of the international left, taught in the most prestigious academic institutions to generations of leftist activists, journalists, professors, politicians, and others. These ideas, the epitome of dehumanization and pathological misanthropy, were not born yesterday and are parts of the major intellectual edifice of leftists' social and political thought.

The proliferation of such intellectual pathologies is what ultimately enables armies of American and European journalists, diplomats, aid workers, NGO officials, and others to totally accept the prevalence of violence, icons of death, and the valorization of cruelty in Palestinian culture, both popular and high, and in education. This leads to the interesting simultaneous recognition and dismissal of the most central problem of the Palestinian-Israeli conflict, the absolute and final negation of Zionism, by any means necessary, as the central ideological content of the Palestinian identity and its symbols. 

The final result is an international behemoth made of international institutional structures established and financed to purportedly solve the Palestinian-Israeli conflict while, in effect, ignoring its core issue. Palestinian media, religious, political, and educational institutions are left to daily indoctrinate members of the Palestinian society into believing that the meaning of their identity is existential victimhood which could be exited only through the total and complete destruction of Israel done by way of blood, death, and sacrifice. 

Anyone who dares to examine Palestinian education, media, literature, poetry, music, etc., would not be able to ignore the unsubtle presence of such violent ideas in Palestinian national symbolism and Palestinian self-image. This is ultimately the root cause of the total insolubility of the conflict. Until this conversation becomes a central component of any efforts seeking peace and stability, the problems of terror, violence, the loss of innocent Jewish lives, and the indoctrination of Palestinian youth will continue. 

I also would not be honest if I don't address the other side of the coin, the people with whom I stand on most issues, the pro-Israel camp. Many in that camp do see with clearer vision the problem with Palestinian identity and its content of terrorism. Yet, they refuse to make any distinction between the Palestinians as humans and the Palestinians as Palestinians. That is, they accept to see the Palestinians exactly the way Palestinian radicalism insists on seeing the Palestinians, walking landmines waiting to explode to totally erase Jewish existence. 

They accept the Palestinian self-dehumanization as the ontological truth of the Palestinians: final, exclusive, and irreversible, and not as humans who are trapped into a terrible story made up by generations of mad intellectuals and sadistic tyrants. This leaves nothing but a security problem against which Israel must remain strong. No will, no wish, no effort, and no thought are spent about the possibility of helping the Palestinians wake up from their self-imposed nightmare and discover a different way to be Palestinian. 

Just to reiterate, I'm not talking here of people who think, feel and talk only in leftist cliches. Those don't see or understand such complex problems anyways. I'm talking about the non-cliche ones who despite understanding the monumental weight of culture and identity refuse to deal with them seriously. 

__________________________________________

I would like to comment on the final three paragraphs, since people like me are the target.

Speaking for myself, I know that in the past I generalized Arabs altogether as permanently imprisoned by their hate for Israel and antisemitism, based on years of reading their own media and social media. The Abraham Accords was a sea change not only for the Middle East but in my perception of hope for the future as well. 

Right now, for the first time, one can see articles sympathetic to Jews in Arab media, especially Bahrain, the UAE and Morocco. Jews and Israelis can walk freely in those countries, much safer than they can walk in parts of Jerusalem. 

I take Palestinian incitement and support for terror very seriously. It is clearly a problem that is based on generations of hate and lies, on media and governments and curricula that simply do not allow freedom of thought or expression or any opinions that run counter to the official lines. Changing that has to be the top priority for any possibility of peace.

But as with the Abraham Accords countries, the change has to come from within.  There is nothing the West can do to change the Palestinian mindset. On the contrary, Palestinians are resentful when the EU or US insist that funds not be used to further support for terror. 

I hope that Mansour is right and the environment that supports the overwhelming Palestinian support for murdering Jews can be changed. But that requires a Palestinian leadership that does not exist and is not on the horizon.



Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Wednesday, February 01, 2023



On Monday, Human Rights Watch's Omar Shakir - a BDS advocate who was hired by that organization not in spite of but because of his rabid hate for Israel - spoke at Yale University about Israel's "apartheid."

During the course of his speech, he predictably engaged in the usual anti-Israel lies, based on the slanderous idea that Israel's non-equal treatment of non-citizen Palestinians is meant to be a system of Jewish supremacy over Arabs.

But then, while actually speaking at Yale, Shakir said the most self-contradictory thing possible:
Shakir then transitioned into a discussion addressing the issue of the academic freedom and space to speak about Palestine on American campuses, with specific reference to Harvard Kennedy School’s fellowship offer, retraction and reoffer to leading human rights advocate Kenneth Roth. 

“What happened to Ken has been happening to academics who are critical of Israel and speak out for Palestinian rights, and young academics and Palestinians are facing the worst,” Shakir said. “Things are changing [and] the conversation is changing and the arc of history is bending, [but] this is happening at the very same time that the situation on the ground is getting worse and worse everyday, so we live in this dichotomy”
If the Zionists have such a stranglehold over academic freedom, how did Shakir manage to speak at Yale?

OK, maybe it is only on some campuses - like Harvard - that the Zionist overlords ensure that the campus only allows pro-Israel, anti-Arab messages to get to the students.

Oops, nope:
Join us for this coming year’s Arab Conference at Harvard, to be hosted between March 3-5, 2023 at Harvard University. 

Previously known as the Harvard Arab Weekend, the Arab Conference at Harvard (ACH) is the largest pan-Arab conference in North America, bringing together over 1300 students and professionals as well as a 20,000-strong livestream audience from across the U.S. and globally to learn from leaders in a diverse array of sectors.
Strange "silencing" of pro-Palestinian voices at Harvard.

But perhaps these events are not academic events - and professors are silenced on campus as to what they are allowed to teach; that anti-Israel academics are severely limited in their "criticism of Israel."

Nope again. 

The very same Omar Shakir who is telling roomfuls of students that academics who are critical of Israel are being silenced and their careers jeopardized tweeted this the very same day:


Yes, an entire course at Bard College by a well-known anti-Israel professor dedicated to spreading a message of racist Jewish evil towards Palestinians. 

That instructor, Nathan Thrall, is so silenced for his views that he wrote a huge anti-Israel article for the New York Times Magazine filled with anti-Israel and pro-BDS lies

The idea that anti-Israel opinions are silenced is a clear falsehood. But in the milieu of the "progressive" Left, victimhood is the coin of the realm, so the Israel haters and modern antisemites have to claim that they are being oppressed while at the same time bullying and shouting down any Zionist voices on campus. 

The entire anti-Israel movement is predicated on lies, and they know that no lie is too absurd to be believed if it is repeated and amplified enough. 




Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 


Thursday, December 29, 2022

The Health and Human Rights Journal has a special section this month: "Settler Colonialism, Structural Racism, and the Palestinian Right to Health." It was organized and curated by the Community and Public Health at Birzeit University and the FXB Center for Health and Human Rights at Harvard University.

Its seven articles are predicated on malicious, antisemitic lies about Israel. The lies - that Israel is a racist, apartheid, settler-colonialist state bent on eradicating Palestinian Arabs and their culture - are accepted as unvarnished truth, without any debate. 

The introduction of an article purported to be about amputations begins with this antisemitic framework:

Since 1948 and with the establishment of the state of Israel, Israel has been deploying physical and structural violence against Palestinians in multiple well-documented ways, all aimed at the erasure, subjugation, and oppression of the Palestinians, in line with what Patrick Wolfe has called the “logic of elimination” in settler-colonial states.[1]

Israel’s colonial ideology is manifested in the “daily assault on Palestinian life as a result of settler-colonial ideology that renders them killable as a part of and a furthering of their removal from their land.”[2] 
Another article's abstract begins with antisemitic lies as irrefutable facts:
In this paper, we examine the social construction of race as a determinant of health inequities in Palestine. Race myths about Palestinians conform to the “logic of elimination” integral to settler colonialism, predicated on the dispossession and removal of the Indigenous people from the land.
These are all absurd and hateful lies. Somehow, the Palestinian population nearly quadrupled under this genocidal regime since 1967. 

Another article based wholly on a lie claims that systemic Israeli racism is behind Israel's "refusal" to provide Covid-19 vaccines into the Palestinian controlled areas. In fact it was the Palestinian Authority that refused to partner with Israel on obtaining vaccines.  And if Israel is racist, then why did it provide vaccines for its Arab citizens - and for Palestinian students at Israeli universities?

Again, the article is predicated on lies, but those lies are not even up for debate. Naturally, their conclusions are based on these lies. The articles are anti-Israel propaganda, pretending to be science, with lots of footnotes as if linking to previously written antisemitic articles in the social sciences or by NGOs is the same as linking to a real scientific paper that has gone through rigorous proof.

One of the articles in the journal outshines the others, though. 

Titled "A Call for Social Justice and for a Human Rights Approach with Regard to Mental Health in the Occupied Palestinian Territories," it says that the only effective method to treat Palestinians' mental health issues is to teach them to blame Israel (i.e., Jews) for their issues.

It seems necessary and urgent to look at the effects of political and systematic violence on Palestinian mental health in order to strengthen the resilience of communities, instead of individualizing their suffering. This can be achieved by moving away from a mental health framework that regards them as individual victims affected by political violence and toward a human rights framework that sees them as rights holders and survivors of a collective experience of violence within a social and political context...

[T]he solution to breaking the cycle of internalization is to be found in resistance and in directing feelings outward, to those who oppress, instead of inward.

Hating Jews - and "resistance," which is understood by Palestinians as physical attacks on Jews - becomes the preferred path to solving Palestinian mental health issues. 

Come to think of it, there are numerous papers about the trauma of Palestinians suffering under Israeli oppression, but I don't recall a single [Palestinian] academic paper about mental illness that might prompt Palestinians to want to kill random Jews. Apparently, the mental health professionals in the territories don't regard terrorists as mentally ill to begin with, but rather as role models who are breaking the paradigm of victimhood, as suggested by these authors.

Beyond that, the authors urge mental health professionals in the territories to become anti-Israel activists themselves, and they rail against the "depoliticization" of their roles - the exact opposite of decades of psychological practice:
A stronger understanding of the political and social implications of trauma and a more active role in relation to social injustices and human rights violations are essential against the background of the ethical standards of our profession. As mental health professionals, our commitment to advancing human rights can be shown by highlighting the pathogenic context in which trauma develops and by demanding social justice on a political level.

All of the articles in this journal have the usual disclaimer that the authors have no competing interests. But one of the co-authors of this article has a supremely competing interest: Samah Jabr is the head of the Mental Health Unit within the Palestinian Ministry of Health. She has every incentive to demonize Israel and declare it the source of all Palestinian problems. 

And, in fact, she does. On her Facebook page, she frames the Israeli celebration of the 100th anniversary of the Balfour Resolution as "celebrating the historical trauma of Palestinians." Her entire mindset is based on nearly all Jews as evil people whose entire goal is to cause pain to Arabs.

A competent mental health professional would note the amount of psychological projection that she shows in this paper. Because the only ones who have physically tried to rid the region of an entire people are her fellow Arabs, not the Jews. 

(h/t MtTB)






Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Monday, December 26, 2022

Over the weekend, the Times of London reported that actress, producer and TV commentator Whoopi Goldberg doubled down on her statements earlier this year that the Holocaust was not about race (and, incidentally, showing that her apology at the time was meaningless:)

Whoopi Goldberg doubled down on her comments that the Holocaust was "not about race," which she made before temporarily being suspended from cohosting the TV talk show "The View" in February.

In a new interview with The Times of London, Goldberg said the Holocaust was not "originally" about race.

"Remember who they were killing first. They were not killing racial; they were killing physical. They were killing people they considered to be mentally defective," she said.

She also questioned whether Jewish people were a "race" compared to herself as a Black person.

"It doesn't change the fact that you could not tell a Jew on a street," Goldberg said. "You could find me. You couldn't find them. That was the point I was making. But you would have thought that I'd taken a big old stinky dump on the table, butt naked."

When Goldberg was asked about the fact that the Nazis classified Jewish people as a race, she responded: "The oppressor is telling you what you are. Why are you believing them? They're Nazis. Why believe what they're saying?"
This is so ignorant that one does not know where to begin.

The two important facts that The View pundit gets completely wrong are:

1. For Nazis, everything was about race.

It is true that the Nazis started their extermination program with the disabled (not only mentally but physically.) But the reason for that was purely racial: to weed out what Nazis believed were undesirable genetic traits in order to breed a Master Race. It was a trial run for their genocide against Jews, targeted also because of their supposedly inferior genetic traits. (Indeed, the Jewish disabled were wiped out first.) 

2. Race is a social construct that has no bearing on biological reality.

Whoopi Goldberg's question, "Why believe what they are saying?' also applies to her. She believes that race is critically important because it is often visible, but in reality there is no "Black" gene. There are no significant genetic differences between people whose ancestors come from Europe, Asia or Africa, and the genetic variation within each group is larger than between groups. 

Goldberg says that Nazi misconceptions about race are meaningless, but anti-Black racist opinions are of the highest importance. 

It gets worse. She seems to be saying that Jews in Europe could have blended into the larger population and not have been persecuted. For religious Jews, this would mean cutting off their beards and payos, changing their clothing, language and accents, and abandoning their religion. 

That is as offensive as saying that Black people could simply bleach their skin to defeat racism. And in both cases, it wouldn't work.

In fact, Goldberg is being more offensive, because her theory appears to be that the Holocaust was partially the Jews' fault - it was white people fighting with white people, both sides responsible, and if only the Jews would have acted differently, they would still be alive today.

There is a deeper issue here, though. How does someone as intelligent and accomplished as Whoopi Goldberg believe such stupidity?

And the reason is because she is an antisemitic bigot herself. 

When you ask Caryn Elaine Johnson why she chose the stage name "Goldberg," she says, "The true story is that my family is Jewish, Buddhist, Baptist and Catholic  . . So I took the last name from a Jewish ancestor."

This is a lie. She has no Jewish ancestors that anyone could find.  But according to one account, her mother thought that her last name Johnson was "not Jewish enough" to make her a star. 

Taking a Jewish name was a career move because Jews control Hollywood.

But there is something deeper here, and it relates to the current flavor of Black antisemitism. 

As we have seen in recent years, it has become fashionable in even mainstream Black circles to claim that Blacks are the real Jews, making Jews imposters. The logic is not based on facts, but on the idea that victimhood is the coin of the realm and since Jews have been history's most prominent victims, Blacks must be the real Jews. 

When being a victim is considered desirable, and anti-Black racism is defined as the ultimate evil,  then the Holocaust becomes an ideological roadblock. The Nazi genocide, which dwarfs the evils of slavery by orders of magnitude, is a problem that must be minimized and explained away to maintain the idea that (anti-Black) racism is the alpha and omega of inhumanity. 

Goldberg needs the Holocaust to not be about racism, because that means that Jews have been much bigger, much more recent victims of racism than Blacks have been - and that waters down the effectiveness of claiming that everything is about anti-Black racism. 

Saying that Jews aren't really Jews and are just other white people also becomes a way for some Blacks to rationalize why Jews went from being a despised minority to a successful group in only one or two generations while most Black people are still at a great disadvantage. It couldn't be that Jews worked hard to transcend anti-Jewish bigotry: that implies that anti-Black racism can be overcome just as anti-Jewish racism was.  That is not an acceptable message in a society that values victimhood over accomplishments. Easier to push the lie that white people always accepted Jews as fellow whites. 

The irony is that the main purveyors of the new Black antisemitism are some of the richest, most powerful and most famous Black celebrities - the very people who managed to become successful despite racism. The Whoopi Goldbergs, Professor Griffs and Ice Cubes prefer to cut Jews down than to bring their fellow Blacks up. 





Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Monday, December 12, 2022








Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Tuesday, December 06, 2022



The Fatah Revolutionary Council ended its tenth session in a meeting in Ramallah today, where it reiterated its support for terrorism.


The slogan of the session was "Resisting occupation and settler colonialism by all legitimate means."

The final statement of the meeting said:
The increase in the pace of killing and cold-blooded executions, the blocking of roads, the demolition of homes, the establishment and expansion of settlements, and the continued detention of the bodies of martyrs, makes our resistance a binding national duty for all and an inevitable and irreversible choice. By all legitimate means guaranteed to us by international law, the occupation and its government bear the repercussions of the self-defense responses that our people and movement engage in in the field, and the international community must shoulder its responsibilities in providing protection for our people .
What does "by all legitimate means" mean? For that, you need to read the 2009 Fatah Platform, which is the most recent one published. The language is identical, but in the Platform, it is defined.
Fatah adheres to the right of the Palestinian people to resist the occupation by all legitimate means, including the right to use armed struggle . Such a right is guaranteed by international law as long as the occupation , settlement , and the denial of our inalienable rights continue .    
So not only are they confirming that terror is legitimate and legal, but that any Jews who are murdered is Israel's fault ("the occupation and its government bear the repercussions of the self-defense responses that our people and movement engage in in the field.")

This mirrors a statement by the PLO Executive Committee earlier this month, where they said, "All forms of resistance are a legitimate right of our people that are guaranteed by international laws."

The Palestinian Authority is subservient to the PLO. This means that terrorism is the official policy of the Palestinian leadership.

The final statement also explicitly supports paying salaries (essentially life insurance policies) to the families of terrorists: "We will not abandon the families of our martyrs, no matter how great the sacrifices are and how great the pressures are."

The PLO and Fatah's support for terrorism is the least-reported story from a region where there are more journalists per square kilometer than anywhere else. These meetings aren't hidden from public view - they are widely reported in official Palestinian media. 

The international media simply doesn't want the world to know that the PLO and Fatah are just as supportive of terrorism as Hamas is. There is an avalanche of articles about how supposedly racist and dangerous the incoming Israeli government is - and not a single one (save for one by the great Khaled Abu Toameh in The Jerusalem Post) that even hints about official Palestinian support of terrorism. 

It is a conspiracy of silence to push a narrative of Israeli evil and Palestinian victimhood at the expense of the truth. 





Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

Thursday, July 28, 2022



I came across this 2021 study in the Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences by Kubin et al: "Personal experiences bridge moral and political divides better than facts."

People believe that facts are essential for earning the respect of political adversaries, but our research shows that this belief is wrong. We find that sharing personal experiences about a political issue—especially experiences involving harm—help to foster respect via increased perceptions of rationality. This research provides a straightforward pathway for increasing moral understanding and decreasing political intolerance. ....In moral and political disagreements, everyday people treat subjective experiences as truer than objective facts.
The paper makes the assumption of goodwill; if you want to convince someone of the truth of your position, enhance your facts with personal experience. The authors suggest that narratives can increase political tolerance.

But it doesn't consider how malicious people weaponize this knowledge in order to lead people away from the facts to begin with  - and how propagandists can use this to increase intolerance.

A commentary on the paper in PNAS does touch on this:
The power that story has over facts to capture the imagination and create respect for an individual’s position is easily exploited. ...Narratives are easily weaponized by propagandists and other bad actors. From this perspective, Kubin et al. may not have uncovered a feature in human discourse that might bridge moral divides but rather a bug that could be easily exploited. While presenting facts garners more respect than claims with no backing at all, these studies still find that narratives beat out facts in creating a greater perception of rationality and even perceived truth. Yet, a position backed by one personal anecdote is no more objectively true than one backed by no anecdote or facts at all. More crucially, a position backed by a personal narrative is not more true than a position backed by facts.

While both narratives and facts can be cherry-picked to support a position, personal narratives, as the authors point out, are unimpugnable. A conclusion drawn from facts, on the other hand, can be disputed and disproven and, thus, science and society should prefer fact-based positions. Yet, when it comes to respect, feelings are prioritized over facts. As these studies show, what is true gains less respect than what one might feel to be true.

Are we to get into a battle of cherry-picked narratives of harm to promote our policy positions, amplified by social media and the ease with which these narratives can spread? How can such narratives be combated? The counter to a story of harm is, by definition, a story of lack of harm (e.g., a vaccine that reduces future infection). However, the larger problem is that the real counternarrative for any anecdotal evidence is found in the data (e.g., a peer-reviewed paper showing the benefits of vaccination for the treatment condition). As such, a troublesome implication of this work is that a false personal story will have more power to create respect than facts, including those facts that would serve to correct the narrative.
This is accurate - but it doesn't go far enough, either.

If narratives are more effective than facts, and personal narratives about being harmed are most effective of all (because no one wants to impugn a personal story about how someone was harmed,) then over time the cumulative narratives of alleged harm by a specific certain group will create hate for that group.

The original study hoped that using personal narratives would increase tolerance. It didn't anticipate that large groups were already weaponizing that as a propaganda method that increases intolerance - towards Jews. Because the Palestinian propaganda machine promotes antisemitism with a torrent of stories about humiliation at the hands of the Jews. 

When a Palestinian goes through a Jordanian checkpoint, they are angry and upset. But when they go through an Israeli checkpoint, even though they are treated with more respect, they claim they are humiliated - because they resent Jews on what they consider their land to begin with. So the only stories the world hears are those of humiliation, whether true or not. And over time the followers of that topic start to believe that Jews are deliberately humiliating Palestinians, because that is what the Palestinian stories say. 

NGOs also weaponize this propaganda tool against Israel. Amnesty and Human Rights Watch reports against Israel are far more detailed and longer than those on other countries. I once did a comparison between two Amnesty reports released around the same time:

Amnesty reports

Israel/WB

Syria/Yarmouk

Title of report

Trigger-happy

Squeezing the life out of Yarmouk

Number of pages in the report

87

39

Number of civilians killed according to Amnesty

22

194

Time period covered

12 months

8 months

Circumstances of their deaths

Mostly while participating in or near violent acts

Starvation, sniper fire, bombings

Number of extensive personal stories given for victims

At least 18, some three pages long

Zero

Number of photos of victims (dead and injured)

At least 14

Zero

Video produced to support report?

Yes, 4 minutes

No

Placement on Amnesty webpage

Linked from front page two weeks after report issued

On front page only the day it was released


Palestinians are humanized and their stories are told. Those stories are detailed and centered on showing how they were harmed and at creating empathy for them. 

Meanwhile, to Amnesty, Syrian victims are just statistics. 

Along with the empathy for the subjects of heart-rending stories comes anger at the victimizers. This is especially true when the storytellers themselves are angry at their supposed tormentors. Just as the audience wants to identify with the victim, they want to share in the anger the victim has towards those they blame for their pain.

So it is no surprise that the Western narrative about Israel, over time, has become more explicitly antisemitic. These same NGOs are now completely at ease in claiming that Israel has a policy of "Jewish supremacy," meant to evoke white supremacy, one of the most evil crimes possible. Singling out Israel as the only current state practicing (a made up definition of) apartheid is another example of normalizing antisemitism in the name of supporting the victims of Jewish greed. Gaza children are only victims of Israeli war crimes; their being cynically used as human shields by terrorists who were the target of the bomb is not mentioned. 

The decades of favoring narrative over facts has created conditions ripe for increased Jew-hatred.

Also, in this world where narratives are favored over facts, there is little penalty for lying. After all, the victims are describing the facts as they claim that they experienced them, and arguing with that is considered to be adding to their victimhood.

One of Israel's reasons for existence is so that Jews will no longer be hapless victims of a world that doesn't care about them. Israel has helped achieve that goal - so now Jews are at a permanent disadvantage in the discourse about which side is in the right exactly because we can no longer claim the same degree of victimhood. And victimhood is the coin of the realm.

There is no defense. Ben Shapiro's famous quote "facts don't care about your feelings" may be true, but facts cannot argue with feelings, either. People want to empathize with and support the real or imagined victims. 

Israel's success at protecting Jews is itself its unforgivable crime, and the Israel-haters are using that success as a reason to try to destroy it. 





Buy the EoZ book, PROTOCOLS: Exposing Modern Antisemitism  today at Amazon!

Or order from your favorite bookseller, using ISBN 9798985708424. 

Read all about it here!

 

 

AddToAny

EoZ Book:"Protocols: Exposing Modern Antisemitism"

Printfriendly

EoZTV Podcast

Podcast URL

Subscribe in podnovaSubscribe with FeedlyAdd to netvibes
addtomyyahoo4Subscribe with SubToMe

search eoz

comments

Speaking

translate

E-Book

For $18 donation








Sample Text

EoZ's Most Popular Posts in recent years

Hasbys!

Elder of Ziyon - حـكـيـم صـهـيـون



This blog may be a labor of love for me, but it takes a lot of effort, time and money. For over 19 years and 40,000 articles I have been providing accurate, original news that would have remained unnoticed. I've written hundreds of scoops and sometimes my reporting ends up making a real difference. I appreciate any donations you can give to keep this blog going.

Donate!

Donate to fight for Israel!

Monthly subscription:
Payment options


One time donation:

subscribe via email

Follow EoZ on Twitter!

Interesting Blogs

Blog Archive