Hezbollah are a group of religious fanatics with genocidal ambitions and that is that.
Well they are, but that isn't that. The Klan is a just club for dipshits, Hezbollah is a serious geo-political and military force with widespread ground level support and nation-state level funding.
And? I dont see how their size or stature should alter our moral judgement of them.
OK, I understand that in some college towns you can go to a peace rally and see some losers standing up for Hezbollah. Given. You can also see Anarchists, Socialist Workers Party, Communist Workers Party, (both of which hate each other), Jews For Jesus, Lyndon La Roach supporters and a whole lot of other weirdos. These people are nut jobs, not the Left, Liberals, Democratic Party or Activist Community. They are not the people who organize the rallies, or who help put them on or who influence politicians or anyone else outside of their private mind garden and secret Tuesday night meetings. So before you go spouting about how the left supports Hezbollah please bring some footnoted and annotated proof.
On the other hand there are people on the left who, like myself, believe that Palestinians are human beings who deserve the right to live. Folks like myself take a lot grief from people on the left like yourself.
I wish you were right, but it's not just the lunatic fringe who endoses hezbollah, as rootless illustrated.
They are not the people who organize the rallies, or who help put them on
I didn't read any support for Hezbollah in any of that. Just some rather dubious claims of antisemitism.
It can be a fine line between being pro-Palestine and being pro-hamas or pro-hezbollah. And there will always be people on the extremes, who will cross that line. But if you???ve ever been involved in leftwing politics, or been on any marches, them you???d see how fractured and multifarious it can be. As Laserwolf already pointed out. And just because one group ???claims??? they organised it, does not mean, by any stretch of the imagination, that everyone on that rally shares their view points.
The eagerness of the activist community to embrace hezbollah as a cause celebre,
OK, I understand that in some college towns you can go to a peace rally and see some losers standing up for Hezbollah. Given. You can also see Anarchists, Socialist Workers Party, Communist Workers Party, (both of which hate each other), Jews For Jesus, Lyndon La Roach supporters and a whole lot of other weirdos. These people are nut jobs, not the Left, Liberals, Democratic Party or Activist Community. They are not the people who organize the rallies, or who help put them on or who influence politicians or anyone else outside of their private mind garden and secret Tuesday night meetings. So before you go spouting about how the left supports Hezbollah please bring some footnoted and annotated proof.
On the other hand there are people on the left who, like myself, believe that Palestinians are human beings who deserve the right to live. Folks like myself take a lot grief from people on the left like yourself.
I wish you were right, but it's not just the lunatic fringe who endoses hezbollah, as rootless illustrated.
To be absolutely clear, I support every human's right to live. It's a right that I believe is inalienable.
I guess I just missed the part where support for Hezbollah was mentioned. The highlighted section was about someone who had not asked to speak at a rally not speaking at it. It ended with this quote from the nut jobs in question:
"We strongly abhor all forms of racism and bigotry, including anti-Semitism. At the same time, we don't believe that criticism of Israeli government policies should be labeled as anti-Semitism any more than criticism of U.S. government policy should be labeled as anti-American."
Unless I missed something both you Rootless misplace criticism of the Israeli government for support of Hezbollah. I have been accused of anti-semitism more than once on this board for criticising the Israeli government. So I will say it again. If you can show me where the mainstream left supports Hezbollah I would be interested in seeing it. Until then what I said before stands.
Why do people keep referring to the KKK in past tense? They are alive and thriving and still have the same goals as they did 50 - 70 years ago, they just became smarter... they wear suits now and rarely show their tradtional ceremonial costumes anymore...
Also understand that your backwoods hicks that you like to refer to the KKK as, are actually alot of very high up politicians and "important" business people... shit is still very relevent today.
Names plaese.
here is one: Edwards family background has a known association with said klan... and he is considered a "good guy"... beyond that you can do the research.
KKK, bigoted... yes... bunch of dipshits... no. Ya'll underestimate their influence and the different forms it has taken/undergone over the years.
The eagerness of the activist community to embrace hezbollah as a cause celebre,
OK, I understand that in some college towns you can go to a peace rally and see some losers standing up for Hezbollah. Given. You can also see Anarchists, Socialist Workers Party, Communist Workers Party, (both of which hate each other), Jews For Jesus, Lyndon La Roach supporters and a whole lot of other weirdos. These people are nut jobs, not the Left, Liberals, Democratic Party or Activist Community. They are not the people who organize the rallies, or who help put them on or who influence politicians or anyone else outside of their private mind garden and secret Tuesday night meetings. So before you go spouting about how the left supports Hezbollah please bring some footnoted and annotated proof.
On the other hand there are people on the left who, like myself, believe that Palestinians are human beings who deserve the right to live. Folks like myself take a lot grief from people on the left like yourself.
I wish you were right, but it's not just the lunatic fringe who endoses hezbollah, as rootless illustrated.
To be absolutely clear, I support every human's right to live. It's a right that I believe is inalienable.
Deleted my post.
The link I saw did not mention Hezbollah. I think again you are confusing criticism of Israel for support of Hezbollah. I know I have repeatedly been accused on this forum for being anti-Semitic because I have criticised Israel. Here is what the link says:
"We strongly abhor all forms of racism and bigotry, including anti-Semitism. At the same time, we don't believe that criticism of Israeli government policies should be labeled as anti-Semitism any more than criticism of U.S. government policy should be labeled as anti-American."
This group was formed days after 9/11. That does make them the radical extreme. Support for GW and war against the Taliban and Al Qeada was at 97% then. Unanimous in Congress. If GW had focused our efforts on the Taliban and Al Qeada and rebuilding Afghanistan both these guys and Al Qeada would be fringe nut jobs today.
HarveyCanal"a distraction from my main thesis." 13,234 Posts
So Guzzo jumps on Michael Eric Dyson and Henry Butler for likening FEMA's disbursement of Katrina evacuees to the slave trade, but then goes on to compare Hezbollah to the KKK.
I guess I just missed the part where support for Hezbollah was mentioned. The highlighted section was about someone who had not asked to speak at a rally not speaking at it. It ended with this quote from the nut jobs in question:
"We strongly abhor all forms of racism and bigotry, including anti-Semitism. At the same time, we don't believe that criticism of Israeli government policies should be labeled as anti-Semitism any more than criticism of U.S. government policy should be labeled as anti-American."
Unless I missed something both you Rootless misplace criticism of the Israeli government for support of Hezbollah. I have been accused of anti-semitism more than once on this board for criticising the Israeli government. So I will say it again. If you can show me where the mainstream left supports Hezbollah I would be interested in seeing it. Until then what I said before stands.
Ok, you got me. I didn't really read the site that rootless linked. You're right; there's no reference to hezbollah.
Please note that my posts in this thread always referred to the far left and the activist community. I am not talking about the mainstream left. That being said, in Canada, member of parliament from mainstream left-of-centre parties--the liberals, bloc quebecois, and the parti quebecois--marched on August 6 in Montreal in a protest that was largely in support of hezbollah. I think this is mostly a case of these politicians being idiots and not having the brains to appreciate that in Montreal any anti-Israel protest is going to be extremist in tone, but it still illustrates my point.
So Guzzo jumps on Michael Eric Dyson and Henry Butler for likening FEMA's disbursement of Katrina evacuees to the slave trade, but then goes on to compare Hezbollah to the KKK.
Dude aren't you in exile for another few weeks or something?
and I really don't see what my belief in the over-dramatization of evacuations during a time of duress being compared to the slave trade auctions (I don't know why its so hard for you to keep these 2 things separate, if it helps just remember one involves boats) and a detailed comparison I gave in one of my post of the similarities I find between the KKK and Hezbollah.
If you're so steadfast in your beliefs that capturing Africans shackling them and putting them on boats so that they could be "seasoned" in the new world is just like people being evacuated from a disaster area then make a nuanced argument. Otherwise go back into hiding, wonder why the lizards are so powerful and find better reasons to obsess over me
I guess I just missed the part where support for Hezbollah was mentioned. The highlighted section was about someone who had not asked to speak at a rally not speaking at it. It ended with this quote from the nut jobs in question:
"We strongly abhor all forms of racism and bigotry, including anti-Semitism. At the same time, we don't believe that criticism of Israeli government policies should be labeled as anti-Semitism any more than criticism of U.S. government policy should be labeled as anti-American."
Unless I missed something both you Rootless misplace criticism of the Israeli government for support of Hezbollah. I have been accused of anti-semitism more than once on this board for criticising the Israeli government. So I will say it again. If you can show me where the mainstream left supports Hezbollah I would be interested in seeing it. Until then what I said before stands.
Ok, you got me. I didn't really read the site that rootless linked. You're right; there's no reference to hezbollah.
Please note that my posts in this thread mainstream left-of-centre parties--the liberals, bloc quebecois, and the parti quebecois--marched on August 6 in Montreal in a protest that was largely in support of hezbollah. I think this is mostly a case of these politicians being idiots and not having the brains to appreciate that in Montreal any anti-Israel protest is going to be extremist in tone, but it still illustrates my point.
I agree, there are people on the far left and in the activist community who support Hezbollah. Like you have said, you can see these people at peace rallies.
We like to think of the KKK and Hezbollah and fascists as pure evil. Their goals, White Supremacy, Destruction of Israel and central authoritative rule, are pure evil. But the individuals who make up these groups may or may not be be evil. Their day to day activities may or may not be evil. People get duped into supporting these groups, because they seem to support basic needs and desires, ie job protection, national defense and making the trains run on time. Some day people in Lebanon (like Germans, and Southerners before them) will live to regret their support for Hezbollah.
On a personal level, my girlfriend works with a former record store co-employee of mine who proudly rocks his support Hezbollah T-shirt. dudes a fucking joke and when I first met him 5 years ago he was rocking a false brittish accent and using words like "teriff".
I haven't even got the stomach to talk to this fucker about his fashion politico bullshit(e)
Dude, I feel the same way about guys sporting pro-israel ts... religious nationalism in any guise is bunk.
On a personal level, my girlfriend works with a former record store co-employee of mine who proudly rocks his support Hezbollah T-shirt. dudes a fucking joke and when I first met him 5 years ago he was rocking a false brittish accent and using words like "teriff".
I haven't even got the stomach to talk to this fucker about his fashion politico bullshit(e)
Dude, I feel the same way about guys sporting pro-israel ts... religious nationalism in any guise is bunk.
One thing that I believe got lost through time and American views on politics is what Israel is what Israel represents.
Israel is a refuge for a persecuted people that have gone through some of the worse horrors humans have gone through over several millenniums. This is not a historical overview but rather a continuation. Hatred of the Jewish people hasn't died, if anything its now en vogue in certain "liberal" communities who see the Jewish refuge as a place to center their hatred.
My love and hate for Israel has nothing to do with my religious nationalism. If anything I am an agnostic bordering on atheism. It has to do with the knowledge that my people are still held to hateful standards by millions if not billions. There are heads of state that vow to the destruction of Jews, there are everyday comments and falsehoods being passed down from generation to generation worldwide about what a Jewish person is.
The Jews need a homeland, they need a place where they can escape the hatred and persecution they've faced for thousands of years and that???s what Israel is. To call is a place of Religious nationalism would be like saying that the NAACP is a hotbed for hatred of non-blacks.
By the way I don???t own any Pro-Israel merchandise, just a belief that Jews would be in a much worse place today without the state of Israel
describing the KKK, Hezbollah, etc. as "pure evil" is pointless insofar as domestic or foreign policy is concerned. The U.S. is not in the business of extinguishing "pure evil" where it exists simply because it's "pure evil."
Let me ask a real question: if Hitler's ultimate ambition with the Nazi party was strictly to eliminate all Jews, gypsies and Catholics within 1930s/40s German borders MINUS the world-domination-landgrab parts of the 3rd Reich's ambition, does anyone REALLY think that European countries - let alone the U.S. - would have really given a fuck? Sure, they would have wrung their hands, there would have been sanctions but you think France and England would have gotten on the telly and been like, "yo - Adolph's wildin' out. We need to invade Germany immediately." I find that highly unlikely, especially in a pre-UN, pre-NATO world.
Evil happens in the world all the time - on large-scale dimensions (hello Darfur, hello Rwanda, hello Kosovo) - but the incentive to intervene by any other world powers is really dependent on a host of different considerations, "fighting evil" only being one of them.
Look at the KKK - with the exception of the Klan Act of 1871, there has rarely been a concerted national effort to limit the Klan's activities, especially not following the 1920s resurgence in Klan membership. State and federal gov'ts didn't COINTELPRO them, didn't firebomb their headquarters, didn't subject the organization to rackateering charges or similar legal steps to destablize. In the end, the Klan's decline was largely self-inflicted as well as reflecting the decline in interest by potential members. It atrophied into decline but was never attacked or assaulted by most state or federal governments. What does that say about a track record in fighting "pure evil"?
Just to state this again: ultimately, things like ideology - even actions - are besides the point. What we have here are conflicts between competing powers trying to jockey for more influence and power. The U.S., for decades, supported right-wing dictators in Central America b/c they saw them as a bulwark against the spread of Communism. This despite documented human rights violations of the worst kind happening in countries like El Salvador and Guatemala.
Consider the following chain of events: 1) Saudi Arabia actually goes democratic. 2) A radical Islamic, anti-Zionist political party comes to power through legitimate diplomatic fashion (shades of Hamas and Hezbollah). 33) The leadership of this new Saudi gov't refuses to recognize Israel nor will they repudiate terrorism BUT seeks cordial diplomatic and economic relations with the U.S.
What would the US do? Declare sanctions? Or mumble an apology to Israel and shake hands with the Saudis?
The eagerness of the activist community to embrace hezbollah as a cause celebre,
OK, I understand that in some college towns you can go to a peace rally and see some losers standing up for Hezbollah. Given. You can also see Anarchists, Socialist Workers Party, Communist Workers Party, (both of which hate each other), Jews For Jesus, Lyndon La Roach supporters and a whole lot of other weirdos. These people are nut jobs, not the Left, Liberals, Democratic Party or Activist Community. They are not the people who organize the rallies, or who help put them on or who influence politicians or anyone else outside of their private mind garden and secret Tuesday night meetings. So before you go spouting about how the left supports Hezbollah please bring some footnoted and annotated proof.
On the other hand there are people on the left who, like myself, believe that Palestinians are human beings who deserve the right to live. Folks like myself take a lot grief from people on the left like yourself.
I wish you were right, but it's not just the lunatic fringe who endoses hezbollah, as rootless illustrated.
To be absolutely clear, I support every human's right to live. It's a right that I believe is inalienable.
I guess I just missed the part where support for Hezbollah was mentioned. The highlighted section was about someone who had not asked to speak at a rally not speaking at it. It ended with this quote from the nut jobs in question:
"We strongly abhor all forms of racism and bigotry, including anti-Semitism. At the same time, we don't believe that criticism of Israeli government policies should be labeled as anti-Semitism any more than criticism of U.S. government policy should be labeled as anti-American."
Unless I missed something both you Rootless misplace criticism of the Israeli government for support of Hezbollah. I have been accused of anti-semitism more than once on this board for criticising the Israeli government. So I will say it again. If you can show me where the mainstream left supports Hezbollah I would be interested in seeing it. Until then what I said before stands.
Thanks for responding.
1. You're right, Hezbollah was not mentioned in that particular article. However, even the most cursory of examinations of ANSWER reveals them to be pretty extreme (supporting Milosevic on the strength of the US opposing him), and I was basically trying to point out that extreme elements are becoming more and more influential within the activist community. ANSWER was, after all, able to rally hundreds of thousands of people nationwide. This is not to say that all of those attending the rallies support ANSWER (I, for one, did not). But I was merely responding to the suggestion that these types of extremists are not the ones organizing rallies, etc.
2. That being said, I have been to plenty of ANSWER rallies (as well as non-ANSWER-affiliated "anti-war" rallies) and seen open, widespread support for Hezbollah and Hamas. No, I don't have any footnotes. But I know what I've seen and felt. Take it or leave it.
3. I would never equate criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism. However, (a) the unfair singling out of Israel for international condemnation, (b) with a singular disregard for the very real threats and realities it faces, (c) in the face of much more widespread and egregious human rights abuses elsewhere (d) in the context of an age-old tradition of blaming Jews for the world's problems at least begs the question. If you don't concede that, you need to be a little more sensitive to Jewish history, etc.
4. Overall I just think people in this thread are down-playing the extent to which people actually like Hezbollah. Guys, Hezbollah is HUGELY popular among many in the West and (dare I say) MOST of the Muslim world. Why deny that?
I agree that the "mainstream" left does not by-and-large support Hezbollah, insofar as the "mainstream" left is represented my the Democratic party, the Unions, and the bigger left-leaning NGOs.
However, Hezbollah is supported by many, many people who identify as "left." This is especially true in Europe. For me, someone that supports such an extreme religious, anti-progresssive (not to mention racist) organization, has no business calling themselves "left."
For me, someone that supports such an extreme religious, anti-progresssive (not to mention racist) organization, has no business calling themselves "left."
However, Hezbollah is supported by many, many people who identify as "left." This is especially true in Europe. For me, someone that supports such an extreme religious, anti-progresssive (not to mention racist) organization, has no business calling themselves "left."
First off, comparing the left & right from the US and Europe is useless. For example, the biggest right-wing party here in the Netherlands, the VVD, is leaning more on the left side on most points than the US Democrats are. So to me there is no left-wing in the US.
Anyway, i identify myself as "left" and i am european but i don't support Hezbollah. I do, however, understand why they are a popular group in Lebanon and why they are terrorising Israel (cause & effect), but i don't understand why Lebanon has been occupied for more than 2 decades by Israel. And i think this is also the case with those people from the west who "support" Hezbollah.
Let me ask a real question: if Hitler's ultimate ambition with the Nazi party was strictly to eliminate all Jews, gypsies and Catholics within 1930s/40s German borders MINUS the world-domination-landgrab parts of the 3rd Reich's ambition, does anyone REALLY think that European countries - let alone the U.S. - would have really given a fuck? Sure, they would have wrung their hands, there would have been sanctions but you think France and England would have gotten on the telly and been like, "yo - Adolph's wildin' out. We need to invade Germany immediately." I find that highly unlikely, especially in a pre-UN, pre-NATO world.
I don't think they would have even wrung their hands. A mass murder of Catholics might have cause some consternation, but, on the whole, North America and Europe could have cared less about the extermination of the Jews. Canada had a "none is too many policy" towards Jewish refugees during the war and anti-semitism was rampant in the US until post-war pictures of auschwitz made people too guilty to keep it overt. Let's have no illusions about the degree to which saving the jews featured in allied war goals.
Let me ask a real question: if Hitler's ultimate ambition with the Nazi party was strictly to eliminate all Jews, gypsies and Catholics within 1930s/40s German borders MINUS the world-domination-landgrab parts of the 3rd Reich's ambition, does anyone REALLY think that European countries - let alone the U.S. - would have really given a fuck? Sure, they would have wrung their hands, there would have been sanctions but you think France and England would have gotten on the telly and been like, "yo - Adolph's wildin' out. We need to invade Germany immediately." I find that highly unlikely, especially in a pre-UN, pre-NATO world.
I don't think they would have even wrung their hands. A mass murder of Catholics might have cause some consternation, but, on the whole, North America and Europe could have cared less about the extermination of the Jews. Canada had a "none is too many policy" towards Jewish refugees during the war and anti-semitism was rampant in the US until post-war pictures of auschwitz made people too guilty to keep it overt. Let's have no illusions about the degree to which saving the jews featured in allied war goals.
You can't be serious. I concede that, some[/b] of the French and the English had/have a tendency towards racism and anti-Semitism. But it???s a fucking huge leap to suggest they would definitely have done nothing while Germany committed genocide. Yer sure, they probably would have joined in if only they had the balls.. I???m not even saying that the English or the French aren???t capable of extreme racist / fascistic behaviour, or even genocide. We know from history that that is not true. But that fact is, they didn???t sit back. Or ???not even be bothered to wring their hands???. There was only one country that could truly be accused of that. The English and French, went and fought, and died in there thousands. And yes, many of them, may not have been there because of the plight of the Jews. But there were many would have. (There have been anti-fascists groups for as long as there have been fascist groups.) And many of them gave their lives. For you to discount their sacrifice so readily is frankly insulting to their memory.
The U.S., for decades, supported right-wing dictators in Central America b/c they saw them as a bulwark against the spread of Communism. This despite documented human rights violations of the worst kind happening in countries like El Salvador and Guatemala.
read gabriel kolko's confronting the third world. the us was also against right wing gov'ts if they were nationalistic (ie nationalizing their resources); i believe, i may be forgetting it's been a while since i read the book, they were against uruguays(?) leader in the 50s even though he was right wing, but he wanted to nationalize their resources. it's all about "open door" policy for us corporations. if they are right wing, left wing whatever as long as they have that open door. usually the us supported military gov'ts cause they could give a fuck about their resources just as long as their coffers were full.
the thing about anti communism may well have been an abhorance about human rights violations but the us was supporting violent, human right violators themselves. it's got to be about economics. it seems to me countries don't usually go through the trouble to fuck with another countries affairs unless it's about economics of that country.
i think in days past we would have invaded or overthrown chavez long ago, but i'm not sure why the us has not done it (i obviously don't want it to happen), i guess cause they know a liberated popultion no longer puts up with that shit. the same forces are at work though and i'm sure some action against chavez is in the works.
oh yeah, i agree with you about the whole nazi thing...hitler won time man of the year for god sakes! and mussolini was referred to as "our kind of guy" by american leaders. seems unlikely that if hitler hadn't started attacking us allies and threatening us economic interests whether they would have done anything. i know it seems hard to believe but look at rawanda, 1,000,000 people dead and no one did anything.
and the whole thing about the middle east that has to be rememebered, it's all about the oil!
You can't be serious. I concede that, some[/b] of the French and the English had/have a tendency towards racism and anti-Semitism. But it???s a fucking huge leap to suggest they would definitely have done nothing while Germany committed genocide. Yer sure, they probably would have joined in if only they had the balls.. I???m not even saying that the English or the French aren???t capable of extreme racist / fascistic behaviour, or even genocide. We know from history that that is not true. But that fact is, they didn???t sit back. Or ???not even be bothered to wring their hands???. There was only one country that could truly be accused of that. The English and French, went and fought, and died in there thousands. And yes, many of them, may not have been there because of the plight of the Jews. But there were many would have. (There have been anti-fascists groups for as long as there have been fascist groups.) And many of them gave their lives. For you to discount their sacrifice so readily is frankly insulting to their memory.
I'm totally serious. You are mistaken if you think England fought the Germans because they were eradicating Jews. It's so easy to say that Germany had some special capacity for anti-semitism that made them unique in the world during the middle of the last century, but that's simply not true.
Like you, I think anti-fascists are great. However, did you know that Polish anti-fascists would often have nothing to do with the Jewish resistance because the Jews were Jews? That's right; the Polish anti-fascists would sooner go it alone against the Germans than fight beside Jews. Very noble, eh?
The French and English fought the Germans for many legitimate reasons and I'm glad they did, but it's plain historical revisionism to suggest that they were sending their men to die for the sake of their Jewish brothers.
The U.S., for decades, supported right-wing dictators in Central America b/c they saw them as a bulwark against the spread of Communism. This despite documented human rights violations of the worst kind happening in countries like El Salvador and Guatemala.
read gabriel kolko's confronting the third world. the us was also against right wing gov'ts if they were nationalistic (ie nationalizing their resources); i believe, i may be forgetting it's been a while since i read the book, they were against uruguays(?) leader in the 50s even though he was right wing, but he wanted to nationalize their resources. it's all about "open door" policy for us corporations. if they are right wing, left wing whatever as long as they have that open door. usually the us supported military gov'ts cause they could give a fuck about their resources just as long as their coffers were full.
the thing about anti communism may well have been an abhorance about human rights violations but the us was supporting violent, human right violators themselves. it's got to be about economics. it seems to me countries don't usually go through the trouble to fuck with another countries affairs unless it's about economics of that country.
i think in days past we would have invaded or overthrown chavez long ago, but i'm not sure why the us has not done it (i obviously don't want it to happen), i guess cause they know a liberated popultion no longer puts up with that shit. the same forces are at work though and i'm sure some action against chavez is in the works.
oh yeah, i agree with you about the whole nazi thing...hitler won time man of the year for god sakes! and mussolini was referred to as "our kind of guy" by american leaders. seems unlikely that if hitler hadn't started attacking us allies and threatening us economic interests whether they would have done anything. i know it seems hard to believe but look at rawanda, 1,000,000 people dead and no one did anything.
and the whole thing about the middle east that has to be rememebered, it's all about the oil!
Dave, I'm really impressed in the way you have educated yourself in the past few years. I remember when your posts were more like "wow, that really happened? I'll have to educate myself."
Thanks for the link Adam, but this was really just a 3 min. condensed version of the hours of news coverage that this incident got over here. And what our papers or politicians will admit publicly is in no way a representation of the people.
As you can imagine WW2 is a large chunk of the history classes in the UK schools. We even, go on trips to Normandy landing sites and visit the sites of concentration camps, as children. It is also widely acknowledged in UK history that Hitler did not want to invade the UK as he felt a kin to the English, and the then leader of the blackshirts (the British fascist group) Oswald Mosley (or to give the fucker his full title, Sir Oswald Ernald Mosley, 6th Baronet) had assured him that Britain would eventually join the Nazis, and he had a fair enough reason to believe so. But he was also met by anti fascist groups every time he spoke publicly, and they often fought in the street. And by the time Hitler had invaded Norway he was imprisoned. So from a very early age we are taught in our schools, the fact that we as a people were pretty close to siding with the Nazis. But we did not. And as I said, there were many at the time, leftwingers and British Jews, who were the first to sign up and fight against fascism.
I'm totally serious. You are mistaken if you think England fought the Germans because they were eradicating Jews. It's so easy to say that Germany had some special capacity for anti-semitism that made them unique in the world during the middle of the last century, but that's simply not true.
I didn't say anything to that effect. Nor, do believe your second statement to be true, either. Concentration camps, after all were a British invention.
Like you, I think anti-fascists are great. However, did you know that Polish anti-fascists would often have nothing to do with the Jewish resistance because the Jews were Jews? That's right; the Polish anti-fascists would sooner go it alone against the Germans than fight beside Jews. Very noble, eh?
The French and English fought the Germans for many legitimate reasons and I'm glad they did, but it's plain historical revisionism to suggest that they were sending their men to die for the sake of their Jewish brothers.
As I already said, I don't think the English (British) went to war purely to save the Jews. There were many reasons for going to war. What I did object to was your assumption that they would have 'just let' the Germans eradicate the Jews, had circumstances been different. It???s a rather large leap to take. And surgests that, in your opinion, my Grandparents, friends of mine, and friends parents, all who were alive at the time, would have heard and seen images of the holocaust, and simply not cared. I wanted to know what facts you were basing this opinion on. And if you thought that the British Jews, who did fight 'for the sake of their Jewish brothers' should just be forgotten about so glibly.
Moke, I'd like to believe you were right on this one, but listen to Danno and Dan. Fascism is not synonymous with antisemitism.
To use the US as an example, we fought this war for "Freedom Equality and Justice" with a segregated army. Many soldiers who were hailed as liberators in France were unable to sit down and eat a sandwich at a restaurant when they got home.
Danno told you about Canada's policy on allowing Jews to emigrate. My whole family would have emigrated to England or the US if they could have. It was very difficult to get into either country.
To get into the US you had to have a family member who was a citizen who would sign an affidavit and agree to support you. You would think every Jew in America was sponsoring as many family members as possible. You would be wrong. In truth, many Jews in America also turned their backs on the suffering of European Jews.
My grandfather convinced a cousin to sponsor my mother. He later sponsored my grandfather and grandmother so as to get rid of mother. One cousin made it to Palestine, one to South Africa, one to Australia. One aunt spent the war in a closet in the Austrian countryside. The rest of my many aunts, uncles, cousins and great grandparents were exterminated. If the US and England cared about the extermination of the Jews they would have opened immigration to them.
If we cared about the plight of poor Mexican peasants we would open immigration to them.
As I already said, I don't think the English (British) went to war purely to save the Jews. There were many reasons for going to war. What I did object to was your assumption that they would have 'just let' the Germans eradicate the Jews, had circumstances been different. It???s a rather large leap to take. And surgests that, in your opinion, my Grandparents, friends of mine, and friends parents, all who were alive at the time, would have heard and seen images of the holocaust, and simply not cared. I wanted to know what facts you were basing this opinion on. And if you thought that the British Jews, who did fight 'for the sake of their Jewish brothers' should just be forgotten about so glibly. Good points.
A great example of what you are talking about are the brigades from all over the world who went to fight the facists in Spain. The US brigade was called the Abraham Lincoln Brigade. Anyone who does not know this history should do some research.
I am sure many good people from all over the world would have stood up and tried to stop the Nazis even if they remained in their boarders. It is unclear if their governments would have joined them.
I know no one who has gone to fight in defense of the people of Sudan. I do know a couple of Mercy Corps people who have brought aid there and our Vitamin was among the first journalists bringing it to attention of the American public.
Dude, I feel the same way about guys sporting pro-israel ts... religious nationalism in any guise is bunk.
If you can't appreciate the difference between a hezbollah t-shirt and an israel t-shirt then your either willfully blind or merely ignorant.
Gee, you're right - what was I thinking? I wonder where in that statement I said wearing a hezbollah t shirt was EXACTLY the same thing as wearing an israeli t. Does Israel not constitute religious nationalism? I merely was pointing out that the sporting of an israeli t smacks of arrogance, akin to that of other nations who are in a position of economic/militaristic superiority over their neighbours. Granted, the Israel situation is very unique, but make no mistake, they are still very severe in their approach to the region. Somehow I think you believe it's OK that Israel unabashedly kills innocents to protect their nation/state. If it's good enough for the U.S...
Moke, I'd like to believe you were right on this one, but listen to Danno and Dan. Fascism is not synonymous with antisemitism.
To use the US as an example, we fought this war for "Freedom Equality and Justice" with a segregated army. Many soldiers who were hailed as liberators in France were unable to sit down and eat a sandwich at a restaurant when they got home.
Danno told you about Canada's policy on allowing Jews to emigrate. My whole family would have emigrated to England or the US if they could have. It was very difficult to get into either country.
To get into the US you had to have a family member who was a citizen who would sign an affidavit and agree to support you. You would think every Jew in America was sponsoring as many family members as possible. You would be wrong. In truth, many Jews in America also turned their backs on the suffering of European Jews.
My grandfather convinced a cousin to sponsor my mother. He later sponsored my grandfather and grandmother so as to get rid of mother. One cousin made it to Palestine, one to South Africa, one to Australia. One aunt spent the war in a closet in the Austrian countryside. The rest of my many aunts, uncles, cousins and great grandparents were exterminated. If the US and England cared about the extermination of the Jews they would have opened immigration to them.
If we cared about the plight of poor Mexican peasants we would open immigration to them.
Fair point.
I would definitely concede that Britain could have done a lot more to help the Jews during this time. But as it was a hypothetical question I still choose to believe that we would have done something to stop this hypothetical holocaust. I could well be wrong. I hope I'm not.
(I did write some stuff about immigration during wartime and other guff, but it crashed twice when I tried to post it, and I need to shup up for a bit anyhow).
Comments
And? I dont see how their size or stature should alter our moral judgement of them.
I didn't read any support for Hezbollah in any of that. Just some rather dubious claims of antisemitism.
It can be a fine line between being pro-Palestine and being pro-hamas or pro-hezbollah. And there will always be people on the extremes, who will cross that line. But if you???ve ever been involved in leftwing politics, or been on any marches, them you???d see how fractured and multifarious it can be. As Laserwolf already pointed out. And just because one group ???claims??? they organised it, does not mean, by any stretch of the imagination, that everyone on that rally shares their view points.
I guess I just missed the part where support for Hezbollah was mentioned. The highlighted section was about someone who had not asked to speak at a rally not speaking at it. It ended with this quote from the nut jobs in question:
"We strongly abhor all forms of racism and bigotry, including anti-Semitism. At the same time, we don't believe that criticism of Israeli government policies should be labeled as anti-Semitism any more than criticism of U.S. government policy should be labeled as anti-American."
Unless I missed something both you Rootless misplace criticism of the Israeli government for support of Hezbollah. I have been accused of anti-semitism more than once on this board for criticising the Israeli government. So I will say it again. If you can show me where the mainstream left supports Hezbollah I would be interested in seeing it. Until then what I said before stands.
here is one: Edwards family background has a known association with said klan... and he is considered a "good guy"... beyond that you can do the research.
KKK, bigoted... yes... bunch of dipshits... no. Ya'll underestimate their influence and the different forms it has taken/undergone over the years.
uh oh.
Deleted my post.
The link I saw did not mention Hezbollah. I think again you are confusing criticism of Israel for support of Hezbollah. I know I have repeatedly been accused on this forum for being anti-Semitic because I have criticised Israel. Here is what the link says:
"We strongly abhor all forms of racism and bigotry, including anti-Semitism. At the same time, we don't believe that criticism of Israeli government policies should be labeled as anti-Semitism any more than criticism of U.S. government policy should be labeled as anti-American."
This group was formed days after 9/11. That does make them the radical extreme. Support for GW and war against the Taliban and Al Qeada was at 97% then. Unanimous in Congress. If GW had focused our efforts on the Taliban and Al Qeada and rebuilding Afghanistan both these guys and Al Qeada would be fringe nut jobs today.
Ok, you got me. I didn't really read the site that rootless linked. You're right; there's no reference to hezbollah.
Please note that my posts in this thread always referred to the far left and the activist community. I am not talking about the mainstream left. That being said, in Canada, member of parliament from mainstream left-of-centre parties--the liberals, bloc quebecois, and the parti quebecois--marched on August 6 in Montreal in a protest that was largely in support of hezbollah. I think this is mostly a case of these politicians being idiots and not having the brains to appreciate that in Montreal any anti-Israel protest is going to be extremist in tone, but it still illustrates my point.
Dude aren't you in exile for another few weeks or something?
and I really don't see what my belief in the over-dramatization of evacuations during a time of duress being compared to the slave
tradeauctions (I don't know why its so hard for you to keep these 2 things separate, if it helps just remember one involves boats) and a detailed comparison I gave in one of my post of the similarities I find between the KKK and Hezbollah.If you're so steadfast in your beliefs that capturing Africans shackling them and putting them on boats so that they could be "seasoned" in the new world is just like people being evacuated from a disaster area then make a nuanced argument. Otherwise go back into hiding, wonder why the lizards are so powerful and find better reasons to obsess over me
I agree, there are people on the far left and in the activist community who support Hezbollah. Like you have said, you can see these people at peace rallies.
We like to think of the KKK and Hezbollah and fascists as pure evil. Their goals, White Supremacy, Destruction of Israel and central authoritative rule, are pure evil. But the individuals who make up these groups may or may not be be evil. Their day to day activities may or may not be evil. People get duped into supporting these groups, because they seem to support basic needs and desires, ie job protection, national defense and making the trains run on time. Some day people in Lebanon (like Germans, and Southerners before them) will live to regret their support for Hezbollah.
Dude, I feel the same way about guys sporting pro-israel ts... religious nationalism in any guise is bunk.
One thing that I believe got lost through time and American views on politics is what Israel is what Israel represents.
Israel is a refuge for a persecuted people that have gone through some of the worse horrors humans have gone through over several millenniums. This is not a historical overview but rather a continuation. Hatred of the Jewish people hasn't died, if anything its now en vogue in certain "liberal" communities who see the Jewish refuge as a place to center their hatred.
My love and hate for Israel has nothing to do with my religious nationalism. If anything I am an agnostic bordering on atheism. It has to do with the knowledge that my people are still held to hateful standards by millions if not billions. There are heads of state that vow to the destruction of Jews, there are everyday comments and falsehoods being passed down from generation to generation worldwide about what a Jewish person is.
The Jews need a homeland, they need a place where they can escape the hatred and persecution they've faced for thousands of years and that???s what Israel is. To call is a place of Religious nationalism would be like saying that the NAACP is a hotbed for hatred of non-blacks.
By the way I don???t own any Pro-Israel merchandise, just a belief that Jews would be in a much worse place today without the state of Israel
describing the KKK, Hezbollah, etc. as "pure evil" is pointless insofar as domestic or foreign policy is concerned. The U.S. is not in the business of extinguishing "pure evil" where it exists simply because it's "pure evil."
Let me ask a real question: if Hitler's ultimate ambition with the Nazi party was strictly to eliminate all Jews, gypsies and Catholics within 1930s/40s German borders MINUS the world-domination-landgrab parts of the 3rd Reich's ambition, does anyone REALLY think that European countries - let alone the U.S. - would have really given a fuck? Sure, they would have wrung their hands, there would have been sanctions but you think France and England would have gotten on the telly and been like, "yo - Adolph's wildin' out. We need to invade Germany immediately." I find that highly unlikely, especially in a pre-UN, pre-NATO world.
Evil happens in the world all the time - on large-scale dimensions (hello Darfur, hello Rwanda, hello Kosovo) - but the incentive to intervene by any other world powers is really dependent on a host of different considerations, "fighting evil" only being one of them.
Look at the KKK - with the exception of the Klan Act of 1871, there has rarely been a concerted national effort to limit the Klan's activities, especially not following the 1920s resurgence in Klan membership. State and federal gov'ts didn't COINTELPRO them, didn't firebomb their headquarters, didn't subject the organization to rackateering charges or similar legal steps to destablize. In the end, the Klan's decline was largely self-inflicted as well as reflecting the decline in interest by potential members. It atrophied into decline but was never attacked or assaulted by most state or federal governments. What does that say about a track record in fighting "pure evil"?
Just to state this again: ultimately, things like ideology - even actions - are besides the point. What we have here are conflicts between competing powers trying to jockey for more influence and power. The U.S., for decades, supported right-wing dictators in Central America b/c they saw them as a bulwark against the spread of Communism. This despite documented human rights violations of the worst kind happening in countries like El Salvador and Guatemala.
Consider the following chain of events:
1) Saudi Arabia actually goes democratic.
2) A radical Islamic, anti-Zionist political party comes to power through legitimate diplomatic fashion (shades of Hamas and Hezbollah).
33) The leadership of this new Saudi gov't refuses to recognize Israel nor will they repudiate terrorism BUT seeks cordial diplomatic and economic relations with the U.S.
What would the US do? Declare sanctions? Or mumble an apology to Israel and shake hands with the Saudis?
as would we all.
Thanks for responding.
1. You're right, Hezbollah was not mentioned in that particular article. However, even the most cursory of examinations of ANSWER reveals them to be pretty extreme (supporting Milosevic on the strength of the US opposing him), and I was basically trying to point out that extreme elements are becoming more and more influential within the activist community. ANSWER was, after all, able to rally hundreds of thousands of people nationwide. This is not to say that all of those attending the rallies support ANSWER (I, for one, did not). But I was merely responding to the suggestion that these types of extremists are not the ones organizing rallies, etc.
2. That being said, I have been to plenty of ANSWER rallies (as well as non-ANSWER-affiliated "anti-war" rallies) and seen open, widespread support for Hezbollah and Hamas. No, I don't have any footnotes. But I know what I've seen and felt. Take it or leave it.
3. I would never equate criticism of Israel with anti-Semitism. However, (a) the unfair singling out of Israel for international condemnation, (b) with a singular disregard for the very real threats and realities it faces, (c) in the face of much more widespread and egregious human rights abuses elsewhere (d) in the context of an age-old tradition of blaming Jews for the world's problems at least begs the question. If you don't concede that, you need to be a little more sensitive to Jewish history, etc.
4. Overall I just think people in this thread are down-playing the extent to which people actually like Hezbollah. Guys, Hezbollah is HUGELY popular among many in the West and (dare I say) MOST of the Muslim world. Why deny that?
I agree that the "mainstream" left does not by-and-large support Hezbollah, insofar as the "mainstream" left is represented my the Democratic party, the Unions, and the bigger left-leaning NGOs.
However, Hezbollah is supported by many, many people who identify as "left." This is especially true in Europe. For me, someone that supports such an extreme religious, anti-progresssive (not to mention racist) organization, has no business calling themselves "left."
First off, comparing the left & right from the US and Europe is useless. For example, the biggest right-wing party here in the Netherlands, the VVD, is leaning more on the left side on most points than the US Democrats are. So to me there is no left-wing in the US.
Anyway, i identify myself as "left" and i am european but i don't support Hezbollah. I do, however, understand why they are a popular group in Lebanon and why they are terrorising Israel (cause & effect), but i don't understand why Lebanon has been occupied for more than 2 decades by Israel. And i think this is also the case with those people from the west who "support" Hezbollah.
I don't think they would have even wrung their hands. A mass murder of Catholics might have cause some consternation, but, on the whole, North America and Europe could have cared less about the extermination of the Jews. Canada had a "none is too many policy" towards Jewish refugees during the war and anti-semitism was rampant in the US until post-war pictures of auschwitz made people too guilty to keep it overt. Let's have no illusions about the degree to which saving the jews featured in allied war goals.
If you can't appreciate the difference between a hezbollah t-shirt and an israel t-shirt then your either willfully blind or merely ignorant.
You can't be serious.
I concede that, some[/b] of the French and the English had/have a tendency towards racism and anti-Semitism. But it???s a fucking huge leap to suggest they would definitely have done nothing while Germany committed genocide. Yer sure, they probably would have joined in if only they had the balls..
I???m not even saying that the English or the French aren???t capable of extreme racist / fascistic behaviour, or even genocide. We know from history that that is not true.
But that fact is, they didn???t sit back. Or ???not even be bothered to wring their hands???. There was only one country that could truly be accused of that.
The English and French, went and fought, and died in there thousands. And yes, many of them, may not have been there because of the plight of the Jews. But there were many would have. (There have been anti-fascists groups for as long as there have been fascist groups.) And many of them gave their lives. For you to discount their sacrifice so readily is frankly insulting to their memory.
http://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=6133603
read gabriel kolko's confronting the third world. the us was also against right wing gov'ts if they were nationalistic (ie nationalizing their resources); i believe, i may be forgetting it's been a while since i read the book, they were against uruguays(?) leader in the 50s even though he was right wing, but he wanted to nationalize their resources. it's all about "open door" policy for us corporations. if they are right wing, left wing whatever as long as they have that open door. usually the us supported military gov'ts cause they could give a fuck about their resources just as long as their coffers were full.
the thing about anti communism may well have been an abhorance about human rights violations but the us was supporting violent, human right violators themselves. it's got to be about economics. it seems to me countries don't usually go through the trouble to fuck with another countries affairs unless it's about economics of that country.
i think in days past we would have invaded or overthrown chavez long ago, but i'm not sure why the us has not done it (i obviously don't want it to happen), i guess cause they know a liberated popultion no longer puts up with that shit. the same forces are at work though and i'm sure some action against chavez is in the works.
oh yeah, i agree with you about the whole nazi thing...hitler won time man of the year for god sakes! and mussolini was referred to as "our kind of guy" by american leaders. seems unlikely that if hitler hadn't started attacking us allies and threatening us economic interests whether they would have done anything. i know it seems hard to believe but look at rawanda, 1,000,000 people dead and no one did anything.
and the whole thing about the middle east that has to be rememebered, it's all about the oil!
I'm totally serious. You are mistaken if you think England fought the Germans because they were eradicating Jews. It's so easy to say that Germany had some special capacity for anti-semitism that made them unique in the world during the middle of the last century, but that's simply not true.
Like you, I think anti-fascists are great. However, did you know that Polish anti-fascists would often have nothing to do with the Jewish resistance because the Jews were Jews? That's right; the Polish anti-fascists would sooner go it alone against the Germans than fight beside Jews. Very noble, eh?
The French and English fought the Germans for many legitimate reasons and I'm glad they did, but it's plain historical revisionism to suggest that they were sending their men to die for the sake of their Jewish brothers.
Dave, I'm really impressed in the way you have educated yourself in the past few years. I remember when your posts were more like "wow, that really happened? I'll have to educate myself."
Thanks for the link Adam, but this was really just a 3 min. condensed version of the hours of news coverage that this incident got over here. And what our papers or politicians will admit publicly is in no way a representation of the people.
As you can imagine WW2 is a large chunk of the history classes in the UK schools. We even, go on trips to Normandy landing sites and visit the sites of concentration camps, as children.
It is also widely acknowledged in UK history that Hitler did not want to invade the UK as he felt a kin to the English, and the then leader of the blackshirts (the British fascist group) Oswald Mosley (or to give the fucker his full title, Sir Oswald Ernald Mosley, 6th Baronet) had assured him that Britain would eventually join the Nazis, and he had a fair enough reason to believe so. But he was also met by anti fascist groups every time he spoke publicly, and they often fought in the street. And by the time Hitler had invaded Norway he was imprisoned. So from a very early age we are taught in our schools, the fact that we as a people were pretty close to siding with the Nazis. But we did not. And as I said, there were many at the time, leftwingers and British Jews, who were the first to sign up and fight against fascism.
I didn't say anything to that effect. Nor, do believe your second statement to be true, either. Concentration camps, after all were a British invention.
As I already said, I don't think the English (British) went to war purely to save the Jews. There were many reasons for going to war.
What I did object to was your assumption that they would have 'just let' the Germans eradicate the Jews, had circumstances been different. It???s a rather large leap to take. And surgests that, in your opinion, my Grandparents, friends of mine, and friends parents, all who were alive at the time, would have heard and seen images of the holocaust, and simply not cared. I wanted to know what facts you were basing this opinion on. And if you thought that the British Jews, who did fight 'for the sake of their Jewish brothers' should just be forgotten about so glibly.
To use the US as an example, we fought this war for "Freedom Equality and Justice" with a segregated army. Many soldiers who were hailed as liberators in France were unable to sit down and eat a sandwich at a restaurant when they got home.
Danno told you about Canada's policy on allowing Jews to emigrate. My whole family would have emigrated to England or the US if they could have. It was very difficult to get into either country.
To get into the US you had to have a family member who was a citizen who would sign an affidavit and agree to support you. You would think every Jew in America was sponsoring as many family members as possible. You would be wrong. In truth, many Jews in America also turned their backs on the suffering of European Jews.
My grandfather convinced a cousin to sponsor my mother. He later sponsored my grandfather and grandmother so as to get rid of mother. One cousin made it to Palestine, one to South Africa, one to Australia. One aunt spent the war in a closet in the Austrian countryside. The rest of my many aunts, uncles, cousins and great grandparents were exterminated. If the US and England cared about the extermination of the Jews they would have opened immigration to them.
If we cared about the plight of poor Mexican peasants we would open immigration to them.
As I already said, I don't think the English (British) went to war purely to save the Jews. There were many reasons for going to war.
What I did object to was your assumption that they would have 'just let' the Germans eradicate the Jews, had circumstances been different. It???s a rather large leap to take. And surgests that, in your opinion, my Grandparents, friends of mine, and friends parents, all who were alive at the time, would have heard and seen images of the holocaust, and simply not cared. I wanted to know what facts you were basing this opinion on. And if you thought that the British Jews, who did fight 'for the sake of their Jewish brothers' should just be forgotten about so glibly.
Good points.
A great example of what you are talking about are the brigades from all over the world who went to fight the facists in Spain. The US brigade was called the Abraham Lincoln Brigade. Anyone who does not know this history should do some research.
I am sure many good people from all over the world would have stood up and tried to stop the Nazis even if they remained in their boarders. It is unclear if their governments would have joined them.
I know no one who has gone to fight in defense of the people of Sudan. I do know a couple of Mercy Corps people who have brought aid there and our Vitamin was among the first journalists bringing it to attention of the American public.
Gee, you're right - what was I thinking? I wonder where in that statement I said wearing a hezbollah t shirt was EXACTLY the same thing as wearing an israeli t. Does Israel not constitute religious nationalism? I merely was pointing out that the sporting of an israeli t smacks of arrogance, akin to that of other nations who are in a position of economic/militaristic superiority over their neighbours. Granted, the Israel situation is very unique, but make no mistake, they are still very severe in their approach to the region. Somehow I think you believe it's OK that Israel unabashedly kills innocents to protect their nation/state. If it's good enough for the U.S...
Fair point.
I would definitely concede that Britain could have done a lot more to help the Jews during this time. But as it was a hypothetical question I still choose to believe that we would have done something to stop this hypothetical holocaust. I could well be wrong. I hope I'm not.
(I did write some stuff about immigration during wartime and other guff, but it crashed twice when I tried to post it, and I need to shup up for a bit anyhow).