This blog thinks it would be a grand idea to propose candidates for the "gold star self-hating Jew" awards.
Heck, this blog thinks it would be a good idea if such an award were regularly given.
This blog does, regretfully, realize that going into excruciating detail on the nominees and why they deserve the award might constitute lashon hara. And we realize that you like this blog precisely because it is so remarkably lashon hara free. Opinionated, but lashon hara free.
So we'll just throw out the name of this week's nominee:
Anna Baltzer
Master (mistress?) of slanted reportage and mis-information, propagandist for evil causes, and by no means a well-willing dupe, as a few of her fans might claim in her defence if pressed on the issue. She's a tool, a willing and convinced tool. The type who would gladly wear a uniform.
http://annainpalestine.blogspot.com/
Trust, me, she's a classic example. This blog has listened to her speak, and repressed the urge to gag and throw poo. Doing so was difficult. She's depraved. And probably ill.
This blog suggests that the readers either nominate their own candidates in the comments, or, if they also air their opinions on the internet, on their own blog.
Feel free to disagree with the opinions expressed above. This is America, and, as far as this blog knows, you still have the right to express your opinions. Even if your opinions are wrong.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
A DUMPSTER FIRE OF TWITTERY
Often while at work I get to hear the sour old dingbats in the backroom spouting Republican drivel and venom. Which does not leave me positi...
7 comments:
Why do people equate active criticism of the State of Israel with antisemitism and self-hatred?
For the record, I'm not only talking about Anna's blog.
Because very often both serve as a comfortable cover for anti-Semitism and self-hatred.
I'll admit that this is not always the case, and that there is a lot of grey area.
It depends on the individual/group, and what they advocate. Most criticism of the state of Israel on the internet, and certainly in the Bay Area, comes from people who will not admit that the State of Israel also gets a lot right, and will further not admit that even with all the encouragement (and money!) from the Europeans and the Americans the Palestinian side fairly consistently does absolutely the wrong thing.
It becomes even more blatant when the pro-Pally side discounts terrorism as "understandable" or a "valid act of resistance".
One of the patterns which is particularly disturbing is that mild critics of Israel, by choosing to stand with those protesting or opposing Israel, both act as protective colour for, and empower the more extreme anti-Israel and anti-Semitic element.
For instance, standing in a demonstration smiling approvingly while others yell "falastin blad'na wa'l Yahud qalab'na" (Palestine is OUR land and the Jews are our dogs) lends support to that mindset, and puts one on the same side as some rather reprehensible folks.
That Israel might be wrong, and that criticism could be justified, does not excuse standing on the same side as people advocating the destruction of Israel and discrimination against Jews.
She is a nutcase. Here , she appears to say that a little kid was paralyzed by nerve gas, but then later on she writes it was tear gas. One hell of a difference. Tear gas is essentially pepper spray...
But LNM is also right. The term self hating Jew is bandied about way too loosely these days.
Regarding the term 'self-hating Jew', you are right. Like 'nazi', it is a devalued currency.
But in a number of cases it is still quite valid, though I would prefer to use 'Jew-hating Jew'.
It is probably best to apply it only to those who clearly have an active antipathy towards the Judaic world - without including those who merely disagree with policies of the Jewish state.
I would include Jews who do not believe that there should be a Jewish state, and Jews whose actions support those who would destroy the Jewish state, in the term 'self-hating Jew' or 'Jew-hating Jew'.
As a glib and very superficial snarky comment, I would say that there are a number of them on the faculty of several universities, not only here but in the land. They're very popular among the passionate students - less so among the rational.
> I would include Jews who do not believe that there should be a Jewish state, and Jews whose actions support those who would destroy the Jewish state, in the term 'self-hating Jew' or 'Jew-hating Jew'.
By this definition Satmar Chasidim are self-hating Jews.
Why not use the term "anti-Israeli"? Or, when appropriate, the phrase "anti-settlement"?
By this definition Satmar Chasidim are self-hating Jews.
Not quite - they don't believe that the current medinah should exist, but when Moshiach comes.....
Satmar is a fascinating anomaly. I don't know quite what to make of them. But while they oppose Israel, they cannot be considered Jew-haters. They disagree with other Jews, and do actually hate certain Jews.
Anti-Israeli and anti-settlement are terms 'within the fold'. Self-hating/Jew-hating apply to people who have deliberately put themselves 'outside'.
By the way, I'm enjoying this conversation very much - at this rate we will probably end up with both a well-reasoned objection to the term 'self-hating Jew', and a better definition of that term.
The problem is you cannot effect change through a careful and nuanced analysis of ideas. Movements and revolutions are accomplished through slogans. "Four legs good, two legs bad".
Effective leaders have always known it.
Post a Comment