Why does the critique of Israeli policy lead to the labeling of being antisemitic?

[Curious George]

BDS supports the return of all Palestinian refugees and their descendants into Israel.
If you do not understand what that means you better read up on the matter.

It does not mean the end of Israel. So, you got nothing. Cool.

 

[Flankerl]

It does not mean the end of Israel. So, you got nothing. Cool.

Only if one fails at basic math and ignores what leading BDS figures including the founder say.


Israel
Population 8,7m
Jew: 6,5m
Arabs: 1,8m
Others: 0,4m

Palestinians
World wide: 12,3m
West Bank and Gaza: 4,7m
Israel: 1,7m (not all of these see themselves as Palestinians)
Diaspora: 5,9

The right of return the Palestinians and their supporters always speak about is about the return of refugees from the 1948 War of Independence into Israel and their descendants who are only counted as refugees because Palestinian refugees are administered by UNRWA while all other refugees in the world are administered by the UNHCR. With the difference being that UNRWA refugees give their refugee status to their descendants while UNHCR refugees don't.

These 5,9 million Palestinians want into Israel.
So let's do the math.

Israel
Jews: 6,5m
Arabs: 1,8m + 5,9m = 7,7
Others: 0,4m
Total: 14,6m

With just that the Arabs are the majority in Israel.

As is often the case in times of change ideological differing parties would work together for a short time. (see the ANC in South Africa)
Since the advent of the Joint List in Israel it doesn't seem far-fetched that Arab parties would work together temporarily to unite Israel with the West Bank and Gaza.
Since they have the majority they get the unification process going.

If Israel and the WB/Gaza would unite we'd then have the following numbers

Israel/Palestine
Jews: 6,5m
Arabs: 7,7m + 4,7m = 12,4m
Others: 0,4m
Total: 19,3

Arabs would be the complete majority of the new state that would probably be named Palestine.
Added to that you'd have the tiny problem that quite a lot of Palestinians hate Jews and want to kill them.
There'd be violence that would make the Lebanese Civil War look like a picnic.

As Arabs have repeatedly stated they would throw the "European Jews" out of the country.
There is just a tiny problem with that, "intermarriage" between Ashkenazim, Mizrahim, Sephardim and Beta Israel. It's just rising every year, my family is a testament to that.
And with more and more "intermarriage" the lines between the different Jewish divisions get blurrier.
So they would probably throw Jews out based on arbitrary reasons. Why? Because it's the middle east and they did the same with the Mizrahim and Sephardim who lived among them.
When this stuff happened in history other Jews usually fled along with those who were thrown out. Not just out of solidarity but because they'd be next.

At the end of the day you'd get another Arab state with a token Jewish minority. Probably some Haredim in Safed and Jerusalem.
Perhaps a seat in parliament like in Iran and that'd be it.
The Kotel or Wailing Wall would probably be destroyed/made inaccessible like Jordan planned in 1967. Jews would not be allowed to visit.
Or they turn the area into a new mosque.

If all the other Arab states are a hint of the direction of the state it would probably be just another failed state.
Because apart from Israeli ingenuity there is absolutely nothing in Israel that separates it from its neighbours. And this ingenuity would leave.


But of course it would probably not come this far. As soon as violence would break out the still Jewish parts of the IDF would take up arms and fight back.
So in the end we'd be back in 1948 with Jewish militias against Arab militias.

There would be no united wonderland. Far too much blood has been shed and the hate is too deep.
Of course with the difference that liberal ideas aren't forbidden in Israel. While they are in the West Bank and Gaza.


“The BDS movement was launched because of the ongoing failure to protect the rights of the Palestinian people. Some of these rights were frittered away: The Right of Return is in danger, the right of our people to the 1948 lands is in danger, and even the right of our people to the 1967 lands. Some of these rights are ignored. The BDS movement was created in 2005, in order to focus on the elimination of the occupation, on the elimination of the system of racial segregation – the Israeli apartheid – and on the right of the refugees to return to the homes from which they were expelled.”

Omar Al-Barghouthi

 

[Epic Beard Man]

Does it annoy you that much that sometimes walls are needed to keep the peace?

It annoys me that this guise of peace is an excuse to justify this wall. This is to assume mistrust and disdain on an entire people. There are approximately 21% Arab Israelis that live in Israel, I'm sure majority of them do not feel entirely "Israeli." Now considering what you said that this wall ended attacks in Israel, well, that remains to be seen. In my view anyone that hates you with the intent to take your life a wall only temporarily mitigates an issue it does not solve it. From the optics this wall represents an intent to divide. This wall represents the similar ugliness and alienation I would say Jews had faced.

Also Apartheid always means that one side has it better than the other.

Israel is financially supported by the U.S., The Palestinians, Trump has since rescinded $200 in aid.

Does it annoy you that much that sometimes walls are needed to keep the peace?

It annoys me that the people who are instructed with God's law and to uphold righteousness and have experienced horror through hurtful isolation are doing the exact same thing they have had done to them. What annoys me is that you cannot see the clear wrongs of what is going on in this situation where there are policies that are in place where it is disproportionately affecting one group of people negatively.

BDS is about the destruction of Israel.
Just be a bit more honest about it

BDS supports the return of all Palestinian refugees and their descendants into Israel.
If you do not understand what that means you better read up on the matter.

And I support a one state solution and the cessation of Israeli settlements on Palestinian territory. I support an equitable solution that does not favor Israelis or Jews, or Palestinians or Arabs, but for all people. I do not support Israel and in fact I rather wish Israel to stand on its own with the United States help. I support the peaceful Palestinian cause in which Palestinians can be free without being oppressed and occupied. the fact that your Netanyahu is corrupt demonstrates the ethical quality that is among the Israeli government. With all that I've said does that make me anti-Semitic? A free Palestine? One state where Israeli Jews lose their privilege and have to share power with people? HMM

I repeat in fact I said I repeat, know more about Angela Davis who has done more for humanity than you ever will do in your lifetime.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

@Curious George apparently @Flankerl likes to cite sources that are "questionable" if you check the link out in her post to you apparently this MEMRI has some bias to be critiqued.

Middle East Media Research Institute (MEMRI) is a Israeli propaganda organization that selectively translates materials from the Arab/Muslim/Iranian press purportedly demonstrating hostility against Israel/Jews.

Middle East Media Research Institute - SourceWatch

MEMRI was co-founded by Meyrav Wurmser and Colonel Yigal Carmon, formerly of Israeli military intelligence, "both of whom were early critics of the Oslo accords."

In November 2004, MEMRI threatened Middle East scholar Juan Cole (Univ. of Michigan) with a SLAPP lawsuit unless he retracted some of his claims.[5]

Nature of the charges pace Cole:

"Colonel Carmon's letter makes three charges: 1) that I alleged that MEMRI receives $60 million a year for its operations. 2) That I alleged that MEMRI cherry-picks the vast Arab press for articles that make the Arabs look bad. 3) That I said that MEMRI was affiliated with the Likud Party."

MEMRI is operated by a group closely associated with the Israeli intelligence organizations. Now, in an article in Haaretz, we find that the Israeli Army has sought to plant stories about "terrorism" in the press, and "Psychological warfare officers were in touch with Israeli journalists covering the Arab world, gave them translated articles from Arab papers (which were planted by the [Israel Defense Forces] IDF) and pressed the Israeli reporters to publish the same news here." --Amos Harel, IDF reviving psychological warfare unit, Haaretz, January 25, 2005.


Good job your credibility is shot.

 

[Flankerl]

Now considering what you said that this wall ended attacks in Israel, well, that remains to be seen

No it doesn't remain to be seen because it has already happened.

There were 146 suicide attacks in the 2000s that claimed the lives of 624 people and injured 891.
86% of the attacks were between 2001 and 2004.
The further the barrier was completed the less attacks have happened.

In the 2010s there have been 2 suicide attacks that killed no one and injured 21.

In my view anyone that hates you with the intent to take your life a wall only temporarily mitigates an issue it does not solve it. From the optics this wall represents an intent to divide. This wall represents the similar ugliness and alienation I would say Jews had faced.

The thing is you have no bloody answer that eliminates the barrier and the attacks on Israelis.
You simply don't.

Like all the other peace activists you expect the Israelis to take the violence and be happy about it until the Arabs stop doing it. If they stop doing it.

That's not a plan. That's insane.

Israel is financially supported by the U.S., The Palestinians, Trump has since rescinded $200 in aid.

Terribly sorry that the financial supporter of the Arab world ceased to exist in 1991?

Also US Aid to Israel goes back to US companies as Israel can't use the "money"(it's not really money, more like a Amazon gift card) for anything else.
So it's basically a supportive program for US companies.

It annoys me that the people who are instructed with God's law and to uphold righteousness and have experienced horror through hurtful isolation are doing the exact same thing they have had done to them.

Israeli - Palestinian conflict
1965 - Today (54 years)

25.000 deaths from both sides combined

462,96 deaths per year
1,26 deaths per day


Einsatzkommando 3 in Lithuania
4th July 1941 - 25th November 1941 (172 days)

137.346 murdered civilians
of those 57.338 adult male Jews
48.592 adult female Jews
29.461 Jewish children
and 2.058 non-Jews (Mentally ill, POWs, "Communists", Clergy, etc.)
0 dead German SS members or Lithuanian Fascists

798,52 murder per day
33,27 murder per hour
0,55 murder per minute

What annoys me is that you cannot see the clear wrongs of what is going on in this situation where there are policies that are in place where it is disproportionately affecting one group of people negatively.

You don't know **** of what I can or cannot see.
Just because I don't support your agenda of destroying Israel doesn't mean that I don't see domestic problems of Israel.

You like many other Pro-Palestinians are unable to distinguish between the simple fact that Palestinians in the West Bank and Gaza are not Israeli citizens.
Israel is under absolutely no obligation to give them the same rights as Israeli citizens.
The stupid wall in the middle of the road does not affect the Palestinians negatively. If it does it also has to negatively affect the Israelis on the other side because both sides of the streets are the same.
Do you understand this?

There have been multiple Peace proposals and the PLO has declined every single one.
Their own Peace proposals are usually under the condition that Israel should cease to exist.
You apparently have no problem with that. It just robs you of all the integrity you could possibly have when it comes to this topic.

And I support a one state solution and the cessation of Israeli settlements on Palestinian territory. I support an equitable solution that does not favor Israelis or Jews, or Palestinians or Arabs, but for all people. I do not support Israel and in fact I rather wish Israel to stand on its own with the United States help. I support the peaceful Palestinian cause in which Palestinians can be free without being oppressed and occupied. the fact that your Netanyahu is corrupt demonstrates the ethical quality that is among the Israeli government. With all that I've said does that make me anti-Semitic? A free Palestine? One state where Israeli Jews lose their privilege and have to share power with people? HMM

And you live in a dream-world because none of what you want is in any way realistic.
The PLO, Hamas, PIJ, Hezbollah all still exist in your made up reality. And they all somehow decide that they suddenly love the Jews and wish them no harm? Yeah sure that sounds like a possibility.

Privileges of Jews in Israel? What apart from the right of return is there?
Jews have no preferential treatment to non-Jewish citizens. They can become quite literally anything they want.
One of the biggest heroes of the IDF isn't even a Jew for crying out loud.
You have Arabs all over the universities, in politics, in scientific fields, as mayors, judges, supreme judges and the list just goes on.
15% of the MPs in the Knesset are Arabs.

You know where you don't have this kind of minority representation? The entire Arab world.

Netanyahu is corrupt? Sure, but on what level?
Well since Israel is a liberal democracy we can have a look.

• "Case 2000" deals with recorded conversations PM Netanyahu had with the publisher of Yedioth Ahronoth, one of the largest newspapers in circulation in Israel. During these conversations Netanyahu is believed to have proposed to push legislation harming Yedioth's major competitor, Israel Hayom, in exchange for more flattering and positive coverage of himself in Yedioth.

• "Case 3000" does not directly involve Netanyahu, as it involves a list of business men, lawyers, and officials in the security organizations in Israel, and their connection to a deal made between Israel and Germany in what may be a bribed deal, for the purchase of three Dolphin-class submarines and four Sa'ar 6-class corvette warships. Some of these individuals are related to Netanyahu in a professional or family ties.

• "Case 4000" regards telecommunications company Bezeq's relationship with its regulator, the communication ministry (Netanyahu being the minister until February 2017), and favorable coverage to Netanyahu in Walla!.
• Case "1270" is an offshoot of "4000" and involves an alleged appointment bribe offer to a Attorney General of Israel candidate in exchange for dropping a case against Netanyahu's wife.

And that's it.


Oh and regarding to MEMRI. It's funny how nothing that you quoted in any way disproves what MEMRI stated.
Was it a mistranslation? No.
Perhaps made up? No.

Do you simply don't like the fact that many Jews understand and speak Arabic and can thus translate the stuff the Arabs say? Yes.

Omar Al-Barghouti said exactly what MEMRI said he said. And it just annoys you that the damn Jews translated it.
Because if he didn't say it you would've given evidence towards it. But you didn't. All you did was attack the messenger.

And you are talking about credibility?

 

[Epic Beard Man]

I rest my case. All I have to say is it would behoove the American Jewish community at least in the Alabama region to not have knee-jerk reactions to label respected academics or to try and get people fired while they remain silent on actual Anti-Semitics one being Donald J Trump and most recently representative republican Steve King who has recently made some serious remarks. If you cannot appropriately label someone especially if you're not familiar with their body of work then its better to remain silent and target the real enemies. Selective outrage and endangering someone's job for a speech or the usage of six words or someone who believes in freedom for a people are not even close to anti-Semitic concepts. Now I understand why the knee-jerk reaction however in the case of Davis and even Hill it is severely misplaced.

 

[rosends]

The Jewish community is very small I understand that, but when you have social, political, and financial influence it does not matter the demographic size of the community. Do you not find it problematic that such a small community that simply complained about an esteemed civil rights activist's support for Palestine is able to influence an award to be given to her problematic?

But you repeat this notion that it is problematic that a small Jewish community has disproportionate influence. That's a question for those who feel pressured -- every community has the right to petition for its own interests. Who said that anyone has to listen? Trust me, there are plenty of anti-Israel (or even anti-semitic, though I am not calling Ms. Davis anti-Semitic, it is just that the link between the two is pretty well established) people who receive accolades and awards and positions in academia or government despite any group's protests. The claim of "influence" smacks of a fear of UNDUE influence.

But when such a small group can make these influential reactions where some people get fired and some have rewards rescinded, it can create this negative reaction where some people may thing how such a small community can wield so much power to influence company moves.

Again, any community only wields the power given to it by others. I'm a member of a Jewish community but does that mean that I can influence you? Probably not as you have no reason to give me any power.

 

[Ellen Brown]

But you repeat this notion that it is problematic that a small Jewish community has disproportionate influence. That's a question for those who feel pressured -- every community has the right to petition for its own interests. Who said that anyone has to listen? Trust me, there are plenty of anti-Israel (or even anti-semitic, though I am not calling Ms. Davis anti-Semitic, it is just that the link between the two is pretty well established) people who receive accolades and awards and positions in academia or government despite any group's protests. The claim of "influence" smacks of a fear of UNDUE influence.


Again, any community only wields the power given to it by others. I'm a member of a Jewish community but does that mean that I can influence you? Probably not as you have no reason to give me any power.

My only disagreement with your premise is those Jews I encounter who are mean to me. It does not always happen. My ignorance about the rules of their belief does not entitle them to be unkind to me when I am trying to make them feel welcome and safe.

 

[rosends]

My only disagreement with your premise is those Jews I encounter who are mean to me. It does not always happen. My ignorance about the rules of their belief does not entitle them to be unkind to me when I am trying to make them feel welcome and safe.

a serious question -- If a particular Jew was nice to you, would you generalize about the group? It seems that people envision a collective identity when there is something bad.

 

[Ellen Brown]

a serious question -- If a particular Jew was nice to you, would you generalize about the group? It seems that people envision a collective identity when there is something bad.

I didn't generalize. There have been both good and painful experiences. Muslims are strange enough, so a bit from Jews should not be alarming.

One of them yelled at me for being in the wrong place on the western wall. Another invited me to their house for dinner. Another really yelled at me a lot for turning off a light. Another offered to teach me about Judaism.

If you knew me, you would know that I have spent a big part of my life trying to cultivate love between other cultures and mine.

 

[rosends]

I didn't generalize. There have been both good and painful experiences. Muslims are strange enough, so a bit from Jews should not be alarming.

One of them yelled at me for being in the wrong place on the western wall. Another invited me to their house for dinner. Another really yelled at me a lot for turning off a light. Another offered to teach me about Judaism.

If you knew me, you would know that I have spent a big part of my life trying to cultivate love between other cultures and mine.

I'm not saying that you did generalize (though there was an earlier generalization which I feel was unwarranted). This branch of the thread had to do with the belief in some monolithic "Jewish community" that has some sort of unexpected influence so the "Jewish community" is a generalized concept when there is a perceived negative. I was simply wondering if you (and in fact, anyone reading this), within the scope of this discussion, would ever think of generalizing when something positive happens because I haven't seen that practice(by anyone on this thread -- not about you).

 

[rosends]

just some light reading on the topic at hand
Angela Davis & Birmingham Civil Rights Institute -- Davis Should Not Be Honored by Anyone | National Review

 

[Epic Beard Man]

But you repeat this notion that it is problematic that a small Jewish community has disproportionate influence.

Then let me rephrase. Any minority community that has sociopolitical influence where they can dictate the fate of another can be problematic. In the example of Dr. Marc Lamont Hill and Dr. Angela Davis we see this as prime examples of this problem. Again, if you compare these two with those within the white house who are actually anti-Semitic I think the community needs to reexamine who is and isn't Anti-Semitic considering two of the most prolific civil rights advocates were targeted.

That's a question for those who feel pressured.

Ok I get this...

every community has the right to petition for its own interests.

Agreed, but when those interests seem to be misplaced often paralleling a stereotype one begins to wonder whether if such is true. When goal posts are moved and categorizations are appropriated to specific individuals one begins to wonder whether those that have political influence and whose interest are of importance to said community6, are fair and just. I'm simply saying the Jewish community in Alabama got this one wrong and the fact that the award was rescinded and given back to Dr. Davis after several people resigned says a lot about whether the community made the right decision to place that label on this person (Dr. Angela Davis). It would help if you read up on it because clearly some people in the civil rights organization disagreed with the Jewish protest to award Dr. Davis. What upsets me as an academic who has a lot of respect for civil rights advocates is that it goes back to what we are complaining about such as those of this minority community who do hold political influence (and please do not think there are members of the Jewish community that do hold influence) can sit there and target certain people but overlook others.

Again one only needs to look at how Trump was welcomed after the shooting at the synagogue considering how this particular welcomed this anti-Semite who the Jerusalem Post stated:

"Documents from a Justice Department discrimination case against Trump launched in 1973 quote one of his rental agents describing a racial code: “Some blacks do live in Trump buildings,” the agent recalled in one March 6, 1974, district court filing, but “Trump Management believes that Jewish tenants are the best tenants.” Another agent was instructed to rent only to “Jews and executives” and to disregard the applications of blacks."

Pride and affirmative prejudice: The complex history of Donald Trump and the Jews

Again we're moving goal posts.....Trump good, Davis and Hill bad.

(or even anti-semitic, though I am not calling Ms. Davis anti-Semitic, it is just that the link between the two is pretty well established) people who receive accolades and awards and positions in academia or government despite any group's protests. The claim of "influence" smacks of a fear of UNDUE influence.

You and @Flankerl fail to specifically state where Ms. Davis has said anything about the Jewish people themselves? Or what about Mr. Hill who made specific clarifications after the criticisms he has received. From the surface it does seem certain groups like the ADL and other groups are pushing their own self-interest but again the common phrase is the "movement of goal posts.

I think things like this is why there is growing tension between the older African-American civil rights advocates and the Jewish community. I don't personally need to sensationalize the stereotype, these events that happen create these stereotypes themselves. I invite you to see the following video:

If I were you read the comment section. I'm not saying I agree, but there are some pissed off people in the comments.

 

[Flankerl]

If I were you read the comment section. I'm not saying I agree, but there are some pissed off people in the comments.

Almost as if Antisemites hate Jews.
But since Angela Davis is a tankie it doesn't really surprise me that she attracts these kind of people.

"In a New York City speech on July 9, 1975, Russian dissident and Nobel Laureate Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn told an AFL-CIO meeting that Davis was derelict in having failed to support prisoners in various socialist countries around the world, given her strong opposition to the US prison system. He claimed a group of Czech prisoners had appealed to Davis for support, which Solzhenitsyn said she had declined.[61] In fact, Jiří Pelikán wrote an open letter asking her to support Czech prisoners, which Davis refused, believing that the Czech prisoners were undermining the Husák government and that Pelikán, in exile in Italy, was attacking his own country.[62] Regarding Czech prisoners being "persecuted by the state", Davis responded "They deserve what they get. Let them remain in prison." [63] Alan Dershowitz, who also asked Davis for support for political prisoners in the USSR, was analogously told "they are all Zionist fascists and opponents of socialism."[64]"

Well she's a Communist so no surprises there. Just not that good if you are the victim of the Communists.

 

[rosends]

Then let me rephrase. Any minority community that has sociopolitical influence where they can dictate the fate of another can be problematic.

But no group can dictate unless it has direct power and control. To influence is to imply a power which is respected by another. The only reason that this Alabama group can influence is because the people who wanted to give the award respected their opinion. The problem arises when these two categories are conflated and people start to talk about the Jewish community as having power to dictate, not influence. That's shifts the burden off of those who let themselves be influenced and onto the Jewish group as dictatorial.

Agreed, but when those interests seem to be misplaced often paralleling a stereotype one begins to wonder whether if such is true.

Stereotypes are often local anecdotal truths used as predictive and defining expectations. The moment they stop being observations of the past, but explanations for the present, a line is crossed. Some Jews, in some case in the past, influenced. Saying that therefore "Jews influence" is the problem.

I'm simply saying the Jewish community in Alabama got this one wrong and the fact that the award was rescinded and given back to Dr. Davis after several people resigned says a lot about whether the community made the right decision to place that label on this person (Dr. Angela Davis).

I haven't argued this point (not out of lack of knowledge -- I actually have read a substantial amount about this issue) because it is immaterial to the thread. The question isn't whether the group was right or wrong, but why they connect one position with another. The fact that many people disagreed should show that the stereotype is flawed, because those others (who might also be called the Jewish community) did not have their desired impact.

those of this minority community who do hold political influence (and please do not think there are members of the Jewish community that do hold influence) can sit there and target certain people but overlook others.

Two things -- first is that, now at least, you see it as a function of individuals, not their group identity, and second, rare is the person who advocates to a level of consistency that all agree on. If I protest "A" then you think that, to be fair, I have to protest "B" while someone else thinks that to be consistent, I have to protest AGAINST "B".

Again one only needs to look at how Trump was welcomed after the shooting at the synagogue considering how this particular welcomed this anti-Semite who the Jerusalem Post stated:

But this is a strawman -- who welcomed Trump? Is it, again, this phantom monolithic "Jewish community"? Plenty of people never welcomed him, and many voted against him from the outset. In this case, he said things that aligned with the wishes of a particular group so members of that group appreciated his sentiments. This is not about blanket approval. I can like that he said something which shows sympathy for my needs, and still think he's not someone I like or admire in other situations.

You and @Flankerl fail to specifically state where Ms. Davis has said anything about the Jewish people themselves?

Why should anyone have to? I ask this for 2 reasons:
1. I never said she was anti-semitic, so providing quotes about that is not in the scope of my position
2. I gave a quote which helps understand why people might equate anti-Zionism with anti-semitism. Therefore, showing quotes that are pro-BDS or anti-Israel is enough, in the light of that quote, to show anti-semitism.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

But no group can dictate unless it has direct power and control.

Which is the case of the Jewish community in this region. Which is also the case with the ADL's response to Marc Lamont Hill. These groups some form of power.

To influence is to imply a power which is respected by another.

Not always as I sometimes see when it comes to comments concerning the Holocaust matter, the ugliness of the past and to prevent the return of such horrors can also be powerful which is why deniers of such atrocities are isolated and rebuked. The sensitivity of this historical fact can also be implemented in academia where members who do critique this part in history are also doomed to be isolated and rebuked due to their opinions whether the Jewish community responds to such Anti-Semitic rhetoric or not, this is power and influence. So no, I disagree, people don't have to respect an entire community for their triumph over oppression simply because this or that community triumphed, for legality purposes some companies or groups don't want to be attached to people who have pejorative rhetoric. For example Richard Spencer is Anti-Semitic. Let's say I hire him not knowing his past and somehow I caught wind of what he believes, of course I'll fire him. Not because I have some philo-semitic feelings, but because his presence and his negative views upon a community can potentially hurt my business. I'm not saying you're completely wrong but just offering an outlier because its not always someone respecting another's power.

The problem arises when these two categories are conflated and people start to talk about the Jewish community as having power to dictate, not influence. That's shifts the burden off of those who let themselves be influenced and onto the Jewish group as dictatorial.

But the Jewish community regardless of the size of the demographic do have some power just as any other minority community, I mean these are the principles of the democratic process here in the states (the majority shall not oppress the minority--Majority Rule/Minority Rights). Now when we get into the discussion of policy influence then we can narrow down who can wield this power indefinitely but no doubt there are elite members from within the Jewish community that do have some influence within the sphere of sociopolitical politics in the U.S. I just think whenever these elite members display their influence often times their identity as being Jewish, is attached to their influence and therefore the "gentile observer" believes Jewry gave them power.

Stereotypes are often local anecdotal truths used as predictive and defining expectations. The moment they stop being observations of the past, but explanations for the present, a line is crossed. Some Jews, in some case in the past, influenced. Saying that therefore "Jews influence" is the problem.

First I never believed an entire minority demographic wields so much power to the extent that religious/cultural stereotypes ring true. I was merely trying to say although I concede perhaps I articulated improperly) that there are specific members (elite members) that wield influence to dictate another person's fate. I agree though as I said in the previous paragraph, that more often than not, elite members of the Jewish community and their influences are often times misconstrued that their actions parallel the actions of the greater Jewish community. But I do make this distinction. I do not see a simple Jewish family who works at a 9-5 just as I do, the same as Donald Sterling who comes from an Ashkenazi background but used to own an NBA ball club.

The question isn't whether the group was right or wrong, but why they connect one position with another. The fact that many people disagreed should show that the stereotype is flawed, because those others (who might also be called the Jewish community) did not have their desired impact.

Strictly commenting on your position on whether stereotype is flawed.....

You must under this is Alabama we are talking about. The greater non-academic portion of the African-American community in that state do not make the distinction between elite Jews and non-elite Jews. Let's keep it real, and not to be funny, they see a guy with a Yarmulke in a suit and tie with a brief case they will assume this person comes from money. They're not going to think this could be a guy that just caught a deal at the Burlington coat factory and is on their way for a job interview. The unfortunate part and let's also put the onus on the Jewish community as well, that yes these stereotypes of this kind are wrong, but I also do not see the Jewish community here in the U.S. actively trying to dispel these stereotypes either. In California especially when I drive down to Encino which there is a large Jewish community there, all I see is money.

Jews keep to themselves and many do not mingle in other communities except rabbis and other figures but these are small numbers so of course the stereotypes will persist so you cannot entirely blame people at least these Alabamians for believing this. But yes I understand your analogy at the end that if you protest A then I assume you also protest B. But as I said before the Jewish community at least in California do not allow me to make that distinction nor are there enough Jews I come into contact with that allow me to make such distinctions. If I'm a kid from the ghetto and I live in a socioeconomic box, and I see people like Donald Sterling yet I do not come into contact with secular Jews, religious Jews or even atheist Jews I'm not going to make those distinctions. If Jews truly keep to themselves collectively then yes these kinds of stereotypes will persist and you cannot get mad or upset about that. I haven't really came into contact with Jews until I went to college. How many inner city youths or even the greater portion of any community get these opportunities?

But this is a strawman -- who welcomed Trump?

The rabbi in this video with the hat said in a CNN interview that "Trump is my president" considering that it was reported that Trump doesn't want "a black to count his money but only Jews." Now I quoted that imperfectly but you're more than welcome to research the actual quote verbatim. Now to be fair there were Jews as well as Muslims who banned to show that Trump was not welcomed but my point is there are members of the Jewish community who overlook Trump's history of anti-Semitism.

I can like that he said something which shows sympathy for my needs, and still think he's not someone I like or admire in other situations.

Well, you're better than me. when he refers to members of my demographic as "a black" or at his political rallies "there goes my black friend there." When he cannot address members of my demographic as persons or people, or has to continuously highlight their phenotype, not to mention having a history of discriminatory practices I cannot get behind that. I think this is why I take issue with some Jewish thought concerning Jewish isolationism. Now, me and @Tumah have discussed this already but I cannot get with the "us versus the world" mentality. I cannot get behind with the "we come first before others" as I see in some Jewish behavior. We are all human beings and God created us all equally. When one person oppresses another we are all oppressed. We all need to get behind each other and as members of the same damn species we tend to serve our own self-interest. I don't mean to make this a religious discussion but regardless whether someone I have disdain for says something I agree with that person is still wrong in my mind because I do not like that person. Trump's relationship with the Jewish community through his daughter means squat to me a racist is a racist and an anti-Semite is an anti-semite. He panders to the Jewish community the same way evangelicals do. Because of supposed power and influence (there goes that stereotype again). The sooner you understand that the better.

 

[rosends]

Which is the case of the Jewish community in this region.

So you are saying that a single group has direct power. That’s a scary statement that you are willing to make.

isolated and rebuked due to their opinions whether the Jewish community responds to such Anti-Semitic rhetoric or not, this is power and influence.

So the fact that an outside group feels influenced or, better yet, because an outside group has a sensitivity to a particular concern means that the Jewish community has power? This gets more and more troubling.

groups don't want to be attached to people who have pejorative rhetoric.

So is it that the rhetoric is pejorative or that the Jewish community has power that those groups are controlled by.

because his presence and his negative views upon a community can potentially hurt my business.

That’s not the power of the community forcing you, that is you respecting the influence that they can muster.

their identity as being Jewish, is attached to their influence and therefore the "gentile observer" believes Jewry gave them power.

If this is the case, then you can accept that it isn’t actually the Jewish community, but individuals that people identify and define by their Jewishness. Buying into it and assigning power to that group identity just perpetuates the belief.

there are specific members (elite members) that wield influence to dictate another person's fate.

There are specific individuals. Defining them by their membership makes one ask why one membership defines them and not another. How many of those “elite” Jews is right handed or likes chocolate ice cream? Somehow, religion is generalized.

I do not see a simple Jewish family who works at a 9-5 just as I do, the same as Donald Sterling who comes from an Ashkenazi background but used to own an NBA ball club.

The fact that you see each as a Jew and not just a person is part of the problem. Do you judge everyone by his religion? Do you go through all the supreme court decisions and consider the religion of each justice when looking at how he voted?

I also do not see the Jewish community here in the U.S. actively trying to dispel these stereotypes either.

It is on me as a random Jew to dispel the ignorant stereotypes by not living whatever life I have the right to live? I had no idea I was supposed to live differently from how any other American is allowed to.

In California especially when I drive down to Encino which there is a large Jewish community there, all I see is money.

When you drive in other neighborhoods do you judge the people by their religion?

If Jews truly keep to themselves collectively then yes these kinds of stereotypes will persist and you cannot get mad or upset about that.

So it is the Jews’ fault that people judge them as a group, and Jews cannot be upset that they are judged as a group. I guess this justifies any base judgment of any group. Blacks live in their neighborhoods so I can judge them as a group. Muslims stay among Muslims so it is OK for me to rely on stereotypes of Muslims. Historically, one of the major causes of anti-semitism was the perception that Jews, because they choose to live with other Jews in order to follow certain religious laws, were worthy of being hated as a group.

The rabbi in this video with the hat said in a CNN interview that "Trump is my president" considering that it was reported that Trump doesn't want "a black to count his money but only Jews."

So a rabbi said it. Maybe he believes it. But what does this have to do with anything? He is an individual, unless you choose to see any visible Jew as representative of that group identity.

there are members of the Jewish community who overlook Trump's history of anti-Semitism.

And those who don’t. Why focus on only part of the community and identify them by their religion, or define their religion by them?

I cannot get behind with the "we come first before others" as I see in some Jewish behavior.

But that’s the Jewish behavior that you are seeing as the expression of Judaism instead of seeing Judaism as a complex and rich tapestry with a variety of approaches and elements.

And, by the way, Jewish isolationism is not identical with “we come first” nor is “we come first” a necessarily bad approach.

 

[Epic Beard Man]

@rosends I'm quite busy at work so I'll respond soon

 

[Curious George]

just some light reading on the topic at hand
Angela Davis & Birmingham Civil Rights Institute -- Davis Should Not Be Honored by Anyone | National Review

Try to see the propaganda for what it is. The spin was so thick, that I would hope anyone would recognize that the author has in fact no rational reason to oppose Davis receiving the award.

 

[rosends]

Try to see the propaganda for what it is. The spin was so thick, that I would hope anyone would recognize that the author has in fact no rational reason to oppose Davis receiving the award.

But that's not what the goal of citing the article is. The question had to do with equating two attitudes. The article helps tie them together.