Lebanon, Palestine & Jewishness…
by Gilad Atzmon
Monday, June 4th, 2012
Gilad Atzmon on Afshin Rattansi’s Double Standard. Gilad Atzmon, novelist, journalist and saxophonist speaks about Lebanon, Palestine, Jewishness and censorship.
The original program can be watched here..
Note: The handsome young soldier in the B&W phot is not me, it is actually my father. The picture was taken in the 1950′s.
Posted by Gilad Atzmon
on June 4, 2012. Filed under Palestine.
You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0.
You can skip to the end and leave a response. Pinging is currently not allowed.
156 Responses to Lebanon, Palestine & Jewishness…
You must be logged in to post a comment Login
Tracking #paedoBritain on Twitter
-
Lee Christmas: RT @Shellspeare: Police probe at least 54 more evil child sex grooming gangs #paedobritain http://t.co/mJClcmPmsv
-
loki: RT @Shellspeare: Police probe at least 54 more evil child sex grooming gangs #paedobritain http://t.co/mJClcmPmsv
-
Richard Felstead: RT @Shellspeare: Police probe at least 54 more evil child sex grooming gangs #paedobritain http://t.co/mJClcmPmsv
Daniel Mabsout
June 5, 2012 at 12:23 am
For the spirit there is one truth ,it does not matter on which side one stands.Brother Atzmon should be listened to from both sides
Gilad Atzmon
June 5, 2012 at 12:51 am
Tx so much Daniel, I really do not think that listening and thinking is a that common anymore..
You have helped me a lot in the last few days,,, I grasped many thing that puzzled me for years …
Deadbeat
June 6, 2012 at 3:03 am
It’s all about TRUTH. Without truth there is NO solidarity and without solidarity there is no resistance.
Gilad Atzmon
June 6, 2012 at 7:21 am
Unless we are marching into the domain of the pseudo-pseudo solidarity, pseudo resistance and pseudo truth all funded and supported by the enemy itself.
Roy Bard
June 6, 2012 at 9:25 am
In the interview Gilad, you say:
“When I equate between Israel and Nazi Germany, I try to be very precise and to clearly articulate what what I am referring to. For instance a lot of people within the Palestinian solidarity community or discourse like to talk about Apartheid, and it makes a lot of sense because people understand what Apartheid is, but I actually argue Israel is not Apartheid. Apartheid is a system of exploitation of the indigenous. When it comes to Israel, Israel doesn’t want to exploit the Palestinians, it wants to kick them out. So to a certain extent Israel is actually performing here a policy that is not different from Nazi lebensraum – living space – which is racially motivated expansionist ideology.”
However, in the interests of accuracy and precision, surely it is not exploitation of the indigenous that is the defining characteristic of Apartheid?
As John Dugard explains:
So, whilst Israel no longer seeks to exploit the labour of the Palestinians*, and is therefore different to the form of Apartheid that existed in South Africa, I do think the difference you highlight is covered by this: deliberate imposition on a racial group of living conditions calculated to cause its physical destruction
It concerns me that if we have a discussion where each party has their own different definition for the key words, then we don’t really ever get anywhere. It seems to me that what Dugard is describing does apply to Israel, and I would be interested to know if you think it doesn’t, and why.
*The replacement of Palestinian labour with migrant labour is a fairly recent phenomena which I think mainly has occurred since the beginning of the second Intifada.
Gilad Atzmon
June 6, 2012 at 4:15 pm
Roy, I fully agree that IsraHell is Racist to the bone and its policy is there maintain J hegemony, when I argue that it isn’t an apartheid, i actually maintain that it is far worse..
Roy Bard
June 6, 2012 at 4:27 pm
I agree that it is pernicious – but I’m not entirely convinced that it is too bad to be described as
I guess I’d describe it as Apartheid+
As Ronnie Kasrils said:
and another quote from John Dugard:
Gilad
June 6, 2012 at 7:04 pm
Roy , these are very intereting quotes that point at the significant differences between israel and apartheid.. Some similar symptoms indeed.. However in SA we are dealing with rigid laws, in the OT we see a continuation of jewisness, racially driven laws that are there to maintain tribal hegemony ..
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 6, 2012 at 7:17 pm
“significant differences”
I got it! Let’s say that Israel is more like Sparta (“The first law is that there shall be no written law”…. with the addition: “not in the places where you would look for them but tucked away in military decrees and administrative regulations).
That’s the ticket: it’s not apartheid it’s more like Sparta if the Spartans wore yarmulkes.
Gilad Atzmon
June 6, 2012 at 11:08 pm
Interestingly enough, Ilan Pappe wrote about it years ago, Ethnic cleansing is taking place when the role of each participants is planted deeply within the culture. This is why we do not find Ben Gurion’s orders for massacres, the young IDF soldiers and commanders grasped their role
Roy Bard
June 6, 2012 at 7:33 pm
Hi Gilad
Yeah we have South Africans saying that it is a an even more pernicious form of Apartheid (and no-one is saying Israel IS South Africa afaics) – but it would be helpful if you could deal with this one please:
“inhuman acts committed for the purpose of establishing and maintaining domination by one racial group of persons over any other racial group of persons and systematically oppressing them”
if those are the the defining characteristics of an Apartheid regime – can we sort out why it doesn’t apply to Israel – (I think it does)
cheers
Gilad Atzmon
June 6, 2012 at 11:16 pm
Hi Roy, the question here is whether these are the defining characteristics or actually the mere symptoms..When you attend the surgery with pain in your shoulder, you expect the GP to diagnose your symptoms and not to send you for a chemo when all you need is painkiller.
Symptoms of different complex situations are sometime similar. For me the differences presented by your quotes are actually very significant. In Israel we didn’t need laws to invoke the last anti Black pogroms in Tel Aviv… It was natural for the Hebraic to hate their black neighbours…the same applies to the WB…Israeli Racism is a direct continuation of Jewish goy hating culture. It is very painful for me to say it,, but this is the truth…
who_me
June 6, 2012 at 11:30 pm
“Israeli Racism is a direct continuation of Jewish goy hating culture.”
and the enthusiasm with which they did their job on the liberty attests to that hatred.
Roy Bard
June 12, 2012 at 1:34 pm
“Israeli Racism is a direct continuation of Jewish goy hating culture.”
Sure just as South African racism was a direct continuation of Apartheid culture.
I’ve been mulling over this – remembering that we started with a quote from you from the interview:
Mondoweiss has an article by Omar Baddar today which notes that people like George Mitchell and Hussein Ibish argue that the term is too inflammatory to be used. He argues that rather than shy away from the word we should seek to demonstrate that it is applicable.
Note how he defines it:
Furthermore he notes that:
I’m still wondering where the problem is and how I can get a better understanding of your viewpoint….
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 7, 2012 at 2:37 am
In confidence to Roy:
You say “apartheid.” G says “No way. It may LOOK like it but it is something else, much worse.”
You bring definitions, criteria, documentation. He says they are symptoms.
You must have bought a few cars in your time, haven’t you? Remember the experience. You have to be able to negotiate. Give a little, take a little. “Mr Bard, what does it take for me to put you in this car today? How about free grounding?”
So… what does it take to put the label of apartheid on Israel? My advice:
1. Go for: “Israel is not your classic apartheid of South Africa. It is a special apartheid, much worse.”
2. But that’s not enough. Throw in the free grounding, for chrissake!
Give him the AZZ-ites and BDS. Make it:
“Israel is not the classic apartheid of South Africa, which AZZs and BDS hangers on would have us believe because they try to obfuscate the role of JP. It is a SPECIAL apartheid, made worse by the jewish identity culture which ensures that ethnic cleansing is carried out spontaneously without written orders.”
Try it, he’ll like it.
(Emoticon optional by individual choice)
who_me
June 7, 2012 at 2:48 am
personally, i prefer comparing israel to nazi germany, and zionism to nazism. i think it’s a better fit than south africa and apartheid.
so do jewish zionists and their goy desciples, judging by their extreme hostility towards such a comparison (with zios, the harsher their reaction, the closer to the truth one is getting).
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 7, 2012 at 2:55 am
“i prefer comparing israel to nazi germany, and zionism to nazism. i think it’s a better fit than south africa and apartheid.”
why not both?
“judging by their extreme hostility towards such a comparison (with zios, the harsher their reaction, the closer to the truth one is getting).”
In the narrative they have written for themselves, the Nazi is like the Devil in medieval illuminated manuscripts. It’s THEIR Satan, no one else can touch it.
who_me
June 7, 2012 at 2:59 am
“why not both?”
i got no problem with that.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 7, 2012 at 3:13 am
I mentioned Satan and searching hasn’t shown up. Odd
who_me
June 7, 2012 at 3:23 am
maybe shehe managed to finally creep past the moderators at mondoweiss with a new nick….
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 7, 2012 at 3:29 am
So? She does not strike me as a one-site woman
who_me
June 7, 2012 at 3:33 am
“So? She does not strike me as a one-site woman”
more than one site would be satanic, no?
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 7, 2012 at 3:38 am
You are ignorant and don’t know what you are talking about and have been corrupted by visiting luciferian sites. I only associate with you to see the depth of evil in you but don’t think I enjoy it.
who_me
June 7, 2012 at 3:48 am
ok
Gilad Atzmon
June 7, 2012 at 9:08 am
Exactly..
Gilad Atzmon
June 7, 2012 at 9:07 am
Actually Ariadna, I am pretty consistent here. I say (all the way through), it isn’t Apartheid, it is actually Lebensraum ideology, i equate Israeli policy with Nazi racist, expansionist nationalism. I can obviously support it, i wrote a book about it.
For the obvious reasons Jews don’t like this comparisons. for the obvious reason some Pls who are heavily funded and supported by liberal Zionists are concerned with this move.. but why are you troubled by it?
Paul Eisen
June 12, 2012 at 1:54 pm
Apartheid applies to South Africa. For example, you don’t call segregation in the Deep South apartheid.
The reason a lot of people like to call what’s happening in Palestine apartheid is because they come from the apartheid struggle (which they think they won, so it gives them hope)and it fits in with the post-war lefty discourse.
Also, it definitely does deflect away from the Jews
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 12, 2012 at 2:43 pm
By the Deep South you mean the black segregation US? If so, that was not apartheid.
Racial segregation and racial laws, yes.
It was not, however, as was the case of South Africa and Israel, a state in which colonists/invaders/settlers occupied the land of the native inhabitants of the country whom it pushed into bantustans and all the rest of the lovely favors bestowed upon them.
I dont see how calling Israel an apartheid — among other applicable names–deflects anything from the Jews, as you say, unless you mean that a recognizably JEWISH name would be better.
Should an Yiddish term be found? Would it be as recognizable to most people as “apartheid” is? Probably not. A Hebrew name even less. Perhaps it should be called the Always-Nakba State.
Paul Eisen
June 12, 2012 at 3:08 pm
It deflects because it diverts from the particularly Jewish character of Zionism. It says that this is just one more example of colonialism/imperialism/racism which we see all over the world.
If that were the case then the often-heard complaint from Zionists “Look around” Why the big fuss about Israel?” Needs to be addressed.
And hey, why shouldn’t Jews wear shorts, ride horses and kill all the natives – you did!.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 12, 2012 at 3:48 pm
Hava Nakbilah?
If you don’t like my suggestions, come up with your own that will be unique.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 6, 2012 at 2:36 pm
“It concerns me that if we have a discussion where each party has their own different definition for the key words, then we don’t really ever get anywhere.”
Let this ¶ be the symbol of applause. Then this is my reaction to your statement:
¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶
Other terms and concepts whose definition has turned out to be different than generally accepted:
COLONIALISM — It does not apply to Israel, we are told, because there is no “mother country” and the counter argument that JP is the mother country is problematic because the ‘leaders’ do not reside in just one country, but in the UK, US and other places. It may be argued, we are told, that Israel itself behaves as a colonial power in Africa.
ART — as noted elsewhere, ‘art’ is inviolable, and encompasses any and all manifestations of “make believe.” As such, of course, being the ultimate expression of make-believe, propaganda is high art, covered by FOA.
ISRAEL–it is not an apartheid, it is not colonialism, it is much worse, we are told, in essence it is a manifestation of deficient ethics. Nevertheless the ethical problem does reside in Israel but in a diffuse global space, impossible to pinpoint without identifying every zionist on the planet.
ZIONISM– no longer exists, it is an anachronistic term that should be abandoned, except when talking about ‘leftist” Jews in the diaspora, most particularly BDS.
The only thing worth doing in keeping with integrity is deLiberating to “kick the Israeli into ethical thinking.”
INTEGRITY –has not been defined yet.
Gilad Atzmon
June 6, 2012 at 4:24 pm
Nice one AT,, you are very familiar with my emerging method
Integrity is an attempt to present a genuine, consistent and coherent approach.
I hardly see any of it these days, and for a reason.. Integrity means mirroring and self reflection..it is painful….
Gilad Atzmon
June 6, 2012 at 4:34 pm
However, some clarification.. I am happy with the idea that the JP is Israel mother country, but then it also means that they are complicit in Israeli crimes.. The Jewish Left,, doesn’t like the idea at all..
Your definition of Art is problematic. I prefer to talk about beauty. You may regard art as a utilization of beauty..
.. Beauty is defined by the aesthetic gratification it stimulates..(this is how I read Kant)
Israelis cannot think ethically while being israelis because replace intellectual obedience with ethical thinking.. they are not alone there..
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 6, 2012 at 6:52 pm
“Your definition of Art is problematic. I prefer to talk about beauty. You may regard art as a utilization of beauty..
.. Beauty is defined by the aesthetic gratification it stimulates..(this is how I read Kant)”
1. No. 2. No. 3. No.
And here’s why:
Art is that which has been (a) produced by humans or (b) selected from nature ready made (objets trouvés) from times immemorial with ONE PURPOSE ONLY: to give aesthetic pleasure.
It is this INTENT that qualifies it as art, not its subsequent potential utilization, which is irrelevant.
That is precisely what separates art from propaganda, be it Proletcultism, Socialist Realism, Maoist China’s operas, or Hasb-Art, no matter how well executed by industrious artists.
Beauty’s perception changes over time, with society, culture, etc , although studies have shown that there are universal essential criteria tied to our very anatomical structure, like symmetry (or its intentional breach that only emphasizes its importance as a guideline, as in Japanese aesthetics), or proportionality in keeping with life-giving ratios (the golden ratio, etc) that we perceive instinctively.
All of this, nevertheless, and beauty alone, do not make art.
A nuclear missile is a thing of beauty: sleek, aerodynamic with a perfect sheen. It looks like Brancusi’s Magic Bird. The latter is art, the former is not.
Art may indeed, and it often does, carry a political or social message because the artist is a man of his time, but he is not an “art functionary” of the state, employed to produce state-approved propaganda.
On the contrary, he is a dissident, a revolutionary, which is inevitably reflected in his work; but the work was created by him with the PURPOSE of creating art, not propagating the state’s message.
who_me
June 6, 2012 at 7:07 pm
“Art may indeed, and it often does, carry a political or social message because the artist is a man of his time, but he is not an “art functionary” of the state, employed to produce state-approved propaganda.
On the contrary, he is a dissident, a revolutionary, which is inevitably reflected in his work; but the work was created by him with the PURPOSE of creating art, not propagating the state’s message.”
you mean like michalangelo?
i don’t think the term beauty can be used to replace the term art, either. art is more of a noun, while beauty is usually adjective. the words have different purposes. in other words, art is usually used to describe thing, while beauty is used to describe some asthetic aspect of something.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 6, 2012 at 7:11 pm
Beauty is not an adjective, but I know what you mean and that you mean well …
who_me
June 6, 2012 at 7:19 pm
i consistantly failed english grammer, but excelled at reading comprehension.
Gilad
June 6, 2012 at 7:18 pm
My dearest Araiadna, don’t you think that propaganda can also be aesthetically pleasing and sometime made with a clear intent to gratify aesthetically? What do you think of the work of Leni Riefenstahl ? I guess that this is why Kant introduced the notion of disinterestedness ..anyway , to stay on the topic, and this is my most important insight today
I think we are getting somewhere , we can and must interfere with the propaganda but must stay a way from the beauty.. So simple.. It only means we need very clever people that would time after time the demarcation line between propaganda and beauty.. This is the role of the philosopher , this is what we lack in the BDS .. Tx for insisting here.. I am really happy with this concept..
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 6, 2012 at 9:38 pm
“don’t you think that propaganda can also be aesthetically pleasing and sometime made with a clear intent to gratify aesthetically?”
Like this, you mean? Beautiful shape, and probably nice Hebrew calligraphy by the young artist:
http://sabbah.biz/mt/archives/2006/07/17/photo-of-the-day-israeli-kids-sends-gifts-of-love-to-arab-kids/
“What do you think of the work of Leni Riefenstahl ?”
I think she was great technician. Skillful cinematography. I think exactly the same thing about Eisenstadt.
” I guess that this is why Kant introduced the notion of disinterestedness ..”
I think you are mixing up again the notions of “art” and “beauty”. I will not repeat myself.
“I think we are getting somewhere”
I’d love to believe it but it looks more like you are like an auto mechanic touring a spare parts warehouse to pick up what he might find usable for the car he has already designed and is in the process of building. So, YOU may be getting somewhere
Gilad Atzmon
June 6, 2012 at 11:44 pm
AT: “Like this, you mean? Beautiful shape, and probably nice Hebrew calligraphy by the young artist:
”
GA: Seemingly you do not fully grasp the notion of disinterestedness, the horrid Israeli girls are not engaged in any aesthetic attempt. Quite the opposite.. and they are soaked with ‘interest’!
AT: “What do you think of the work of Leni Riefenstahl ?”
I think she was great technician. Skillful cinematography. I think exactly the same thing about Eisenstadt.
G: Do you find any beauty in their work? Because i do..by the way do you mean Eisenstein?
AT: ” I guess that this is why Kant introduced the notion of disinterestedness ..”
I think you are mixing up again the notions of “art” and “beauty”. I will not repeat myself.
G: Ariadna, it may as well be possible that you do not acknowledge the importance of ‘disinterestedness’ is Kant;s 3rd critique. Art, however, is an institutional notion, it is defined by norms and conventions… yet beauty is actually pure, it is a content that cannot be denied or debated (at least in Kant’s view) Interestingly enough, even my bitterest detractors admit sometime that they like my music. They hate me but they somehow differentiate between myself and that which pours out of my band. Can you explain this discrepancy? … it is not the artist in me whom they approve.. it is actually the beauty that doesn’t belong to me.
AT: I’d love to believe it but it looks more like you are like an auto mechanic touring …
G: Actually, i really get somewhere, you helped today to formulate a categorical imperative that could, for the first, help us bridge the gap between ‘sanctions’ and ethics. All we need is a dynamic demarcation between beauty and the rest. We do not need rules,, we do not need civile societies to tell us what is Kosher, we need philosophers who know who to produce an ethical argument..This is exactly what we miss…
who_me
June 7, 2012 at 12:21 am
back in the 70′s, a friend recomended an album of ted nuggent’s that had cat scratch fever on it. so i went out and bought a copy. listened to it once and realised i was using the record for the wrong purpose. this wasn’t something one puts on a turntable and torments their ears with. i then took it off the turntable and went outside. there i flung the thing like one would a frisbie. it flew ok, but broke on landing. apparently it wasn’t meant to be thrown, either.
at the time, i was irked because i was out $5-6 for something which had no known usefulness, but thinking back on this, i’m wondering if i inadvertantly defaced “beauty”?
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 7, 2012 at 2:08 am
GA: Seemingly you do not fully grasp the notion of disinterestedness, the horrid Israeli girls are not engaged in any aesthetic attempt. Quite the opposite.. and they are soaked with ‘interest’!
—-
YES! Finally, you agree even without your noticing. It is the intentionality that makes the difference. The girls are not engaged in an aesthetic attempt, that is why it is not art; but beautiful it may be, as I also mentioned before when I compared a missile with the Brancusi’s bird. Both may be beautiful in a “disinterested way” but only one is art.
GA: Art, however, is an institutional notion, it is defined by norms and conventions
—
Not necessarily. The cavemen’s drawings were not defined by norms or institutionalized yet they are both beautiful AND art.
Your music obviously is both beauty AND art–it follows from everything said so far.
GA: All we need is a dynamic demarcation between beauty and the rest.
____
Oops, we disagree again. There is and can’t be a “definition of beauty.” It is there, even when it is… ugly, or it isn’t.
We only need to demarcate ART from the rest. For me intentionality does the job: art for itself, for the artist’s NEED to express himself, for the audience’s NEED to share it and enter his world.
Ulterior motives in creating it produce propaganda or kitsch.
Gilad Atzmon
June 7, 2012 at 9:50 am
Ariadna,, i really think that it is a terminological matter here,, at least i now understand what you mean,
“The girls are not engaged in an aesthetic attempt, that is why it is not art; but beautiful it may be, as I also mentioned before when I compared a missile with the Brancusi’s bird. Both may be beautiful in a “disinterested way” but only one is art.”
G: but if a Pls artist presents the image of the morbid girls in a London art show as a part of a gallery of Israeli destruction then it would be transformed into art (contextualisation). This is why i refer to beauty and not to art. This is why i speak about the differentitation between beauty and politics (as opposed to art/politics). Art is a pretty vague concept as far as i am concerned, especially after modernism.. I guess that this is why Kant spoke about the genius and explored the detachment between the genius and his/her work….The genius is producing ‘beauty’ not ‘art’
AT: Not necessarily. The cavemen’s drawings were not defined by norms or institutionalized yet they are both beautiful AND art.
G: But the art council of Britain decides who to fund and how to allocate money to ‘art’, in practice they decide what and who may survive. But if something survives despite the funding, it is because of the beauty.
AT:Your music obviously is both beauty AND art–it follows from everything said so far.
G: thanks so much but to be honest,,, i am only concerned with beauty… I do not know how to be concerned with ‘art’
AT: There is and can’t be a “definition of beauty.” It is there, even when it is… ugly, or it isn’t.
G: Indeed, this is why i speak about a “dynamic demarcation” it will change all the time, this is why we need philosophers who ‘deliberate’ as opposed to Jewish vandals seeking libidinal gratification..
AT: We only need to demarcate ART from the
G: if you replace the word ‘art’ with ‘beauty’ , it would make more sense..
For instance ,,, i don’t mind stopping Israeli artist, but it is the beauty which i want to let free or protect…This would imply that we keep the J vandals out of the gallery, theatre and the concert hall..but campaigning is totally kosher..
searching
June 7, 2012 at 8:41 pm
“For instance ,,, i don’t mind stopping Israeli artist, but it is the beauty which i want to let free or protect…This would imply that we keep the J vandals out of the gallery, theatre and the concert hall..but campaigning is totally kosher”
……………
Why do you insist on calling all “art” a “beauty” is beyond my comprehension.
This is getting too ridiciulos to discuss.
I know you protect your tribal, chosen by “genus”artist’s identity, but this is getting a little too much.
So ..”an artist” who created the musical piece praising the racists, supremacists Israel and its crimes, I mean, achievemnents, needs to be protected ,because of the “beauty” of his spirit ,which shows in his musical piece that praises an opressive state??
That why me may campaign ,in secret, hidden somewhere in a dark ally , far from the artist’s eye because his sensitive soul may get hurt and his ‘genus” may leave him for good ,and this would be devastating for the all humankind.
If artists do something wrong, it is not them, it is a spirit, a “genus”, who gave them wrong advice. Bad, bad “genus”.
Go an sit in a corner for 3 days .
who_me
June 7, 2012 at 2:41 am
art for art’s sake is a recent thing. a lot of what we call art now was things that had other purposes in mind when made. this probably includes “caveman” paintings. same with music.
the idea of elevating “art” or “beauty” to something special is like elevating this:
http://englishrussia.com/images/abandoned_city/14.jpg
or this:
http://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/windows/desktop/aa974175.aspx
to special status. everyone has their own ideas of what is “art” and what is “beauty”. applying a special status to something subjective, such as “art” or “beauty”, works about as well as giving catholic priests a say in the matter of human sexuality.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 7, 2012 at 1:38 pm
Gilad: “it isn’t Apartheid, it is actually Lebensraum ideology…….for the obvious reason some Pls who are heavily funded and supported by liberal Zionists are concerned with this move.. but why are you troubled by it?”
—
What bothers me can be summed up in word: COMMUNICATION.
Ortega y Gasset put it brilliantly: “For the depth to become visible it must first become surface.”
People–”disinterested people” (in the best sense of the word), like me and untold millions of others, not those vested in perpetuating and strengthening the status quo) look at Israel and compare it with other outrages of the past, known to them: apartheid, colonialism, Nazi Lebensraum.
No “outrage” against humanity is exactly like another, although they may share motive (racism, greed, desire to dominate), means (military and financial power) and opportunity (if not apparent they will extract by the forceps of false flag ops).
When you talk about these categorical descriptions and classifications you are, in my opinion, an excessively purist stickler that says trenchantly: No, it’s not #1, not #2, some but nit all of #3 but it is totally unique and different and… far worse.
It does not serve communication best. It does not help depth to become surface.
Yes, Israel is unique as a state in its specific characteristics but you cannot remove all the already known referential terminology, as you know from Logic 101.
It is more intuitively accessible and still ACCURATE to say Israel is ALL of those while being unique as an effigy, a rallying point and a visible stage where JP is played.
It can be in fact also demoralizing for most people to be told that it is pointless to focus on Israel when the real problem, JP, is elsewhere and everywhere, diffuse and virtually impossible to tackle other than by providing ethical rehabilitation for Jews.
Israel is not diffuse, it has precise latitudinal and longitudinal coordinates and there are concrete and practical ways to to “delegitimize” it that do hurt JP.
This is not to say that if you do that you should do nothing else, or stay silent about JP. Indeed the banking collapse and the bankruptcy of Western economies are easily tied to JP and more people than ever before understand it, as they do the wars carried out in the ME to make it safe for Jewish domination.
The same communication problem goes for the term “zionism.” It may well be just a historical term with no currency in Israel today, but worldwide its usage translates as the ideology that supports ‘Zion”, aka Israel, and this usage will prevail in the world as long as Israel will continue to exist qua Israel. Rejecting the generally held meaning of the term means that you confuse people and that you will always have to preface whatever you have to say by first lecturing people on what it means in Israel. it is a waste of time IMO, and counterproductive to the aim of maximum clarity for maximum impact.
That is what troubles me.
Gilad Atzmon
June 7, 2012 at 2:47 pm
Ariadna, do you really think that I seeking precision here for the sake of self indulgence?
The issues are actually highly complicated and I wrote about them extensively.
In short, our ‘left’ Jews want us to stick to colonialism and Apartheid because:
1. they know how to handle it from a Marxist perspectives..
2. it also means that the Jewish State is as bad as any other colonial force but just a bit better
3. It somehow present a resolution (post colonial phase etc’)
I say NO to 1,2 & 3
Israel and Zionism are unique homecoming projects and J identity politics is uniquely and morbidly racist. We better deal and accept the uniqueness of the situation and think of a solution accordingly. Otherwise we are wasting a lot of time and energy..
searching
June 7, 2012 at 3:17 pm
And I have to agree with you, Gilad, that Israel , Zionist is a very ,very
Not on a mass scale for sure, individaully yes.
unique project. I call it, straight from hell and I think I am , unfortunately, not mistaken.
How do we fight it?? I would say knowledge, info, change of lives and renouncing all evil from our personal lives, prayer etc.
I know those last two things are not gonna happen .
…. So I think we are doomed as a civilisation. But we do have to fight against it, no matter what the outcome. Only cowards give up without fight.
Maybe there will be some miracles working in out favour??
Btw. I read Polish news and there are some info flying lately that SOMETHING will happen during those soccer games that start tomorrow. Major provocation?? False Flag?? People are very uneasy but thay sense something bad.
There was NEVER a sitution like this before in the world that people, from everywhere, from a different countries sensed that something is terribly wrong, that something is trying to overpower and destroy them.
This feeling is everywhere. People do feel it.
Sarah Gillespie
June 7, 2012 at 2:24 pm
Gilad what you say about protecting the beauty, not the artist, is very clever. A distinction between art and beauty is also helpful. The ancient Romans believed that all creative force was orchestrated by divine spirits that inhabited the walls of artists studios. These beings were called ‘genus.’ The conduit (or artist ) was therefore, neither narcissistic or ashamed of their work because it was not created by him, but his genus. After The renaissance shift towards rational humanism, the genus took up permanent residence within the perimeters of the individual. Many great (& otherwise rational) artists sense that the beauty that pours from them is mysterious and not ‘of them’. At the risk of sounding like a horoscope-reading hippy moron, this is why I feel that boycotting beauty is impossible. It would be like trying to boycott the sky.
AT – I have shared your concerns regarding terminology, challenging concepts & pragmatics. It has troubled me as well. But ultimately is that not the task of the iconoclast, to shatter the coordinates of our common understanding & give birth to a new reality? We have been held hostage by systems of knowledge premised in the enlightenment. Gilad is bursting through it and that entails a radical shift in semantics.
Gilad Atzmon
June 7, 2012 at 2:50 pm
Indeed Sarah, being an artist it is easy for you to see it… we are searching for beauty,, we never try to make ‘art’
searching
June 7, 2012 at 3:01 pm
Gilad , are you speaking in your own name or in the name of “all artists and art”??
If you are in your own name ,that’s fine. You have, of course ,a full right to it.
If you are speaking in the name of “all artists” and “art”, then you are full of balooney.
I suspect that by renouncing /giving up your “Jewish identity” ,and becoming a “proud self-hating Jew”, you had to ,nonetheless ,still search for a identity. A new one.
People can’t function without a identity. Art became your identity, and you do seem believe in a special Chosennes of “artists and art”, and you do share somewhat tribal loyalty with them.
So we do move. From one tribe to another. BTw , it takes guts to switch the tribe.
The tribe always considers it somewhat treacherous, though.
Gilad Atzmon
June 8, 2012 at 1:19 am
I never speak in the name of anyone,,, and certainly not in the name of ‘art’
Art is not my identity. I may be regard as an artist, but this is just a matter of symbolism.. the production of beauty is my way of making a living..it gives me pleasure and pain. Tonight, for instance, i played a completely new set of compositions (for the first time) ,,, it is not there yet, seemingly, i don’t understand my own music yet and it gives me a lot of pain..by the time i understand it, it will shine,, However, I didn’t make ‘art’ today,, i struggled to produce beauty.. This is the real issue here,,, this is what Sarah also tries to tell you.. maybe, it s not that easy to grasp…
searching
June 8, 2012 at 1:41 am
So say it more clearly. ex: For me an art is….
I think my job as an artist is ….
I struggle to produce beauty…
Instead you ‘ve said a general statements like ,ex: “art is beauty”.
” Art is defined by its aesthetic value, it aims at beauty whether it is performed by a Jew, gentile,Black or Yellow!!! ”
I understand that for you, personally ,
art is a beauty and it should be, but it is your opinion not shared by many of so-called artists.
Some share it, many don’t.
Gilad Atzmon
June 8, 2012 at 9:02 am
The truth of the matter is that I know what art is,,,and this is where i do not agree with AT,,,a lot strange thing that keep me cold are entitled as ‘art’… but i know what beauty is.
Interestingly enough, for Kant the notion of beauty being subjective means that it is actually shared by all of us,,, we are all similarly overwhelmed by beauty but won’t agree on what ‘art’ is (due to convention and institutionalization)… this is a complicated matter.. it took me one year of reading to understand it.. do we want to go there?
Somoe
June 7, 2012 at 5:04 pm
All of Israel and her citizens, be they officials or artists, must be made to feel the condemnation of the world at large before they will act to change what is at fault and rejoin it. Whilst I accept that not all Israeli artists and musicians are supportive of the Israeli regime – they must also be included in the boycott because they form part of the collective being Israeli.
I agree with Ariadna over the art and beauty issue. By suggesting that exceptions be made to exclude performances or product of Israeli musicians, artists and actors and calling them ‘beauty’ you muddy the waters. FOE doesn’t apply also as previously pointed out they are only being restricted outside of Israel, and were one so inclined one could visit Israel to experience the beauty of their artistic expression. Collaborations between artists are one of the key evolving factors in the arts and by depriving Israeli artists in this way, the sense of isolation will be significantly emphasized and keenly felt.
Such actions (boycotts and sanctions) are taken to punish those who fail to abide by International Law, and Israel consistently treats IL with contempt. Why shouldn’t the world respond in kind? Some things are more important than beauty – Truth and Integrity would dictate to me that Freedom for all citizens in the illegitimate state of Israel is paramount and that Israel’s freedom to peddle their cultural icons around the world comes way down the list. Until everyone is equally free in that land, everyone with a conscience should unite to exclude them from global integration/’normalization’.
I thought Deadbeat made a very compelling argument on the BDS thread about how Mossad uses such cultural/arts events to their advantage to carry out covert and false flag missions, and that in itself is reason enough not to allow Israelis to freely promote their ‘art/beauty’ around the world for me. Why make it easy for them to manipulate world affairs?
As long as everyone is prepared to carry on as usual, without making these distinctions we will continue to plod along under the illusion that someday things will change without it ever really being possible.
Gilad Atzmon
June 8, 2012 at 1:27 am
2 problems here..
1. one if we stop Israelis why don’t we really stop all Zionists… I really don’t grasp it..let me tell you,, a boycott threat of Zionists around the world would change World Jewry attitude towards Israel in less than 48 hrs..
2. I do not have a major problem with the academic/culture campaign but I ve a problem with activists shouting over a violin concerto is promoting the Pls cause…
Just out of interest, how would you help a Pls singer facing the same form of vandalism… I believe that we must be better than Israelis..
searching
June 8, 2012 at 2:06 am
simple to explain.
If one shouts over a violin concerto that is sponsored by an oppressive state of Israel, then it may get some major attention, and
so- called good people of the world take the side of the shouting person ,becasue they know that she/he had a noble intentions.
And many will wonder why she/he was shouting and start asking valid questions.
It will actually create more attention than you not buying avocado, made in Israel ,for your guacamole.
If Pls singer , doing a concert commemorating massacre in Gaza, will be disrupted by a bunch of screaming Israeli ,then it will also may get some major attention.
This time so- called good people of the world will be on the side of Palestinian singer.
People more or less know what is wrong or right. There are being manipulated, but once they know the truth they kind of like it.
As you can see the IMPACT of cultural boycott is much wider , bigger, then that of not buying an ahava cream or a green olive.
Btw
I understand your position of an artist.
We are stepping with our dirty shoes on your sacred, artistic territory ,which you are obliged to protect.
searching
June 8, 2012 at 3:18 am
but Gilad ..we still love you
Artis or not artist, beautuful or not so much.
BTW I liked your radio interview with Jeff Rense and brother Nathaniel that you placed on your website.
Very good, worth putting here.
Gilad Atzmon
June 8, 2012 at 9:07 am
One my mistake, it is not my artistic territory..
I am not so sure Pls oud players deserve this treatment, an I wouldn’t like Brits touring with British council money to be treated as such .. it is a principle… we do not sabotage beauty..
Unless we really insist to operate as Israeli vandals…by the way, i don’t see us becoming a ‘mass movement’ doing that…
Roy Bard
June 8, 2012 at 11:01 am
Everything thats wrong with Israeli “beauty” in one sentence by the Israeli Press Service on the Jerusalem Quartet:
During the Apartheid era we were told that sport has nothing to do with politics. Yet somehow it was no co-incidence that the rugby teams were made up of members of the minority.
It was never a level playing field.
If those 3 russians dropped their rifles and returned to Russia, no-one would be disrupting their concerts….
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 8, 2012 at 1:55 pm
¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶
________________
¶ = applause sign
Jay Knott
June 8, 2012 at 2:54 pm
The SA rugby and cricket teams were racially selected. I don’t think you’re old enough to remember the D’Oliveira ban. That was the beginning of the end for segregated sport, and apartheid. Similarly, those three Russian Jews are in the Jerusalem Quartet because of their race, and Arabs aren’t.
I don’t know if you remember Paul Simon either. He refused to boycott SA. He put art and beauty before politics!
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 8, 2012 at 3:01 pm
Well observed, Jay. Paul Simon never turned down an opportunity to show his tribal allegiance by touring in the “Holy Land” either, even after may artists started refusing to do so.
I will say that I appreciated your comment, which I can’t find it now in the labyrinthine (your fav word in replies to me) thread of posts and replies to the effect that, although you personally would not participate in a boycott of (Israeli) artists you would not oppose it. Hope I am not misquoting you.
Jay Knott
June 8, 2012 at 3:10 pm
Yeah – I didn’t agree with boycotting Paul Simon, but I wouldn’t go to see him when there were protesters at his gigs. That was then. Today, I think I’m coming round to the Ariadna faction
Roy Bard
June 8, 2012 at 4:38 pm
I was only a preteen when the D’Oliveira ban happened, and don’t recall it, but I certainly do remember Paul Simon – I’d already left South Africa by the time he did Graceland.
Dali Tambo, the founder of Artists Against Apartheid
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 8, 2012 at 5:41 pm
Even though published in the MSM and largely an exoneration of Simon’s refusal to honor the anti-aparthed boycott, the article is rich in revealing details:
1. Simon was “astonished” that the SAs visiting NYC thought they needed a permit to visit Central Park. How absurd indeed. Such interdictions are kosher in the other apartheid he supports.
2. He broke the boycott but… not really, see, he “arranged recordings” so it would look like he technically did not.
3. He and the SA producer–Hilton Rosenthal–were the right people to to help popularize SA music. You don;t need to smash apartheid to liberate all that beauty, all you need is some Jews to mentor and guide the selected artists on the right path.
Apparently Rosenthal had not exerted himself to popularize SA music abroad before the anti-boycott apartheid exposed the strong ties between SA and is sister apartheid state. I wonder where he is now. Any SA gigs being promoted at present? Any SA musicians being shown Central Park?
4. “As he brainstormed” Simon came up with the lyrics of “acceptance and tolerance”: “I have every reason to believe we will all be received in Graceland.” Not the OTHER Graceland, of course.
So THAT’s how you “make a strong statement”: with an Israel-protecting, Jewish-sponsored “metaphor of grace.”
Roy Bard
June 9, 2012 at 9:54 am
“Apparently Rosenthal had not exerted himself to popularize SA music abroad before the anti-boycott apartheid exposed the strong ties between SA and is sister apartheid state. I wonder where he is now. Any SA gigs being promoted at present? Any SA musicians being shown Central Park?”
Hee you gotta larf
“In 1990 he formed the Los Angeles-based Rhythm Safari Records before finally settling near Sydney, Australia, re-launching the label there and, in 2009, following it up with a stage show of the same name.”
However he is still working with Johnny Clegg and on Clegg’s latest album there is a song called “Love in the time of Gaza” which contains the perplexing lines:
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 8, 2012 at 2:10 pm
¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶¶
Paul Eisen
June 8, 2012 at 2:59 pm
So soon we’ll have all-round right-on, painting, music, drama, films, literature.
Yippee!!!
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 8, 2012 at 3:02 pm
Paul, I don’t understand your comment. Could you please clarify it?
Paul Eisen
June 8, 2012 at 3:17 pm
Well, when you’ve all finished boycotting everything you don’t like, you’ll be left only with the things that you do like.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 8, 2012 at 3:29 pm
Seriously, Paul, is that how you see the kernel of this dispute?
Those who advocate the boycott on this site are not trying to boycott “everything we don’t like” but only one specific category: ISRAEL, and its exports, notably cultural exports.
If that is also, as I hope, your understanding, are you then suggesting that the effect of this boycott would be to amputate Western culture by arbitrarily cutting out “everything we don’t like”?
Bear in mind that the boycott does not affect Israeli art on its home turf, only its use abroad for political purposes, and that it serves as a very visible and powerful way to draw attention to the State for Jews and its nature.
Paul Eisen
June 8, 2012 at 5:01 pm
Yes, that does seem to be the kernel of the argument.
A group of people have decided that thay know what should or shouldn’t be seen and then, by a notabkly ugly act, impose their view on the rest of us.
I find that pretty ugly and it goes a long way to show why so many (de)Liberation movements end up in the shit.
Jonathon Blakeley
June 8, 2012 at 5:14 pm
LOL I might frame this
searching
June 8, 2012 at 5:32 pm
well, another group decided that they know what should or should not be done/seen, and then impose their views on the rest of us, trying at the same time act like they are the deliberated ones.
Boycotting exported green olive and avocados made in Israel–yes
Boycotting pro-Zionism art/academic culture exported from Israel — no, no.
If you boycott their culture/art/academia you hit them straight in their roots, if you boycott olives and avocados you just slide on the surfice.
Let’s not focus on the roots, lets just pick a few leaves.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 8, 2012 at 5:59 pm
“A group of people have decided that thay know what should or shouldn’t be seen and then, by a notabkly ugly act, impose their view on the rest of us.”
That is a good description of the top-down official censorship that:
– regulates what you see (e.g., I recall the Palestinian-made movie that was not accepted in an international film festival because “Palestine is not a recognized state.” The same festival accepted one made in Kosovo);
– in 16 states of the world puts you in the jail if you “deny the holocaust.”
“I find that pretty ugly and it goes a long way to show why so many (de)Liberation movements end up in the shit.”
Ugly? Yes. It has not landed anyone “in the shit” yet. In fact war criminals glorified in that same “culture” are free and prosperous, as are the bank robbers who stole more than just a few millions.
Bottom-up, individual boycotts and protests that are ugly to you do not aim to deprive you of more than perhaps an Israeli performance or they might annoy listeners to Benny Morris’ lectures. They are not out to remake the language into DoubleSpeak, nor to rewrite the cannon of Western art—as the top down indoctrination and censorship has been doing for decades.
They only place Israel in the category it belongs for all to see.
I am still not clear what deLiberation movements ended up in the shit as you say. Would they be internet debating sites that you consider “movements”?
who_me
June 8, 2012 at 7:36 pm
Paul Eisen
“Well, when you’ve all finished boycotting everything you don’t like, you’ll be left only with the things that you do like.”
i’ve been doing that foe a long time. i don’t buy things i dislike, i don’t watch entertainment i don’t care for, i don’t read books i don’t like, etc. there are still some things i have to put up with which are beyond my control, but i do cut out those things i can when i find i have a distaste for them.
doesn’t everybody do this?
Paul Eisen
June 8, 2012 at 9:34 pm
Not ‘buying’ something you dislike is a far cry from trying to stop others from ‘buying’ it.
who_me
June 9, 2012 at 12:23 am
Paul Eisen
“Not ‘buying’ something you dislike is a far cry from trying to stop others from ‘buying’ it.”
depends on the degree to which one goes. when i don’t like something, i usually mention it to friends and explain why. that goes for products, art, whatever. they do the same with me about theirs. that is personal boycotting and letting others know about it. i’m not trying to prevent them from buying/liking the thing, but by way of expressing my opinion about it, but i am trying to influence their decision. we all do this.
in regards to israeli products, and “beauty” or no “beauty”, art is a product, i don’t buy them. i encourage family and friends to do the same. this is a political boycott. some things i boycott because i simply don’t care for the way they are. for a long time i boycotted american products, both because american foreign and domestic policies, and american behaviour in general, disgusted me, and also because american products were usually of an inferior quality. living in the usa, that wasn’t exactly always easy to do.
when one takes it to try and prevent others buying what one boycotts, that is taking it too far. then one is imposing upon others. that whole scene, even if done “for good” reasons is counterproductive. few like having others determine what they can or can not do or experience.
note, there is another aspect. if i own a business and chose not to sell israeli products through that business, that is a personal choice, not an imposition upon others. i’m not obligated to sell something i personally find distasteful. the same applies if i’m a member of a co-op and we put it to a vote, or whatever the members of the co-op decided would be a suitable means of coming to a decision on the matter.
businesses and individuals make these kinds of decisions about products for business, quality and personal reasons all the time. it’s never an issue. that is, until the product is boycotted for political or the product is “art”.
in my mind, an imposed boycott is more like sanctions than a boycott.
searching
June 7, 2012 at 6:38 pm
Gilad,
here is something for you to read.
It is time to stop being wonderfully naive, and time to smell the coffee,my friend.
http://www.traditioninaction.org/Cultural/D012cpArtAndMacabre_MTH.htm
http://www.traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/c021ht_ModernArt_4.htm
http://www.traditioninaction.org/HotTopics/c018ht_ModernArt_2.htm
and many more……
Paul Eisen
June 8, 2012 at 6:20 pm
Ariadna
In arguing against my opposition to your kind of censorship you simply quote similar censorship by the other side. Then you go on to argue that your kind of censorship is okay but their kind isn’t. Personally, I think you have more in common with those you oppose than you think.
Regarding which (de)Liberation movements end up in the shit, I was referring to this one (Is there another similarly named website?), and my referring to it as a ‘movement’ is exactly what it’s looking like and why it’s slowing desecending into the shit.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 8, 2012 at 6:45 pm
Re: Your first paragraph
It appears that to you Power shutting down free speech is the same as free speech shouting down Power. Top and Bottom are on the same level and the only opposition acceptable is one that preserves decorum.
Re: Your second paragraph.
It appears that you contradict the first: the very same free speech you advocate, when exercised on deLiberation threatens to transform it into a “movement.”
I disagree with both and will continue to do so until you ban me from the site as the agent of a potential movement that pushes deLib into shit.
Until then, here’s a peace offering. I love this piece but not wishing to appear to curry favor with my artistic superiors it is in the interpretation of another artist I like:
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=TRhOD4u_tCM&feature=related
Paul Eisen
June 8, 2012 at 9:31 pm
First you seem to be saying that silencing others is okay as long as your cause is just and you are a victim. But the Israelis think their cause is just and they certainly have felt like victims. So, who is to decide whcih cause is just and who has the right to silence others?
Then you seem to suggest that in criticising deLiberation I’m guilty of some kind of hypocrisy. How is that? I’m not trying to silence deLiberation.
Finally there is your allusion to you being banned. What on earth is that about?
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 8, 2012 at 10:53 pm
“you seem to be saying that silencing others is okay as long as your cause is just and you are a victim.”
Protesters shouting at the repressive and powerful DoubleThink are not on a par with Brave New World’s shutting up dissent and imprisoning dissenters. THAT is free speech.
“the Israelis think their cause is just and they certainly have felt like victims. ”
All the more reason to boycott them LOUDLY so more people can see through he LIE.
“you seem to suggest that in criticising deLiberation I’m guilty of some kind of hypocrisy. How is that? I’m not trying to silence deLiberation.”
You are not trying to silencing it; you are warning against what you see as a dangerous debate path that would push it into the shitter. In your own mind you are not a hypocrite. You are just as convinced of your ‘coherence’ as the Israelis are of their victimhood: sincerely.
In my mind you are not a hypocrite either; you are, however, the opposite of coherent: you are inconsistent. To you deLiberation would be degraded if deliberations were to include certain debates, like over anti-Israeli activism, such a boycotts. Deliberations should be only about… deliberations. Let’s talk only about talk.
“there is your allusion to you being banned. What on earth is that about?”
It was not an allusion. I said outright that I am unlikely to change my position and would continue to state it as long as I am here. Perhaps in addition to being banned I should have mentioned all other possible adverse contingencies: dying, getting bored out of my skull or, who knows, even suffering a conversion to a hamletian stance, availing myself somehow of a skull certified to have belonged to a late BDS follower and soliloquizing:
“To boy-, or not to boycot — whether ’tis nobler in the mind to suffer
The slings and arrows of dershowian greenies
Or to take arms against them and by opposing, diss them?”
Paul Eisen
June 9, 2012 at 7:38 am
Your comment is infused with the conviction that you are right and those you oppose are wrong. This seems to be the main difference between us.
This is not to say that I don’t have opinions or that you shouldn’t have opinions. I just think our opinions should be tempered with far more participation in the feelings of others. (This does not mean that you agree with them).
I have had strong Zionist feelings and, though i’ve certa I’d be both a liar and a fool to say that they have gone. In fact, I’m hugely suspicious of people who claim to have ‘changed’ to that degree.
Of course,this leads to no end of trouble. To me, it is as clear as day that the German people loved Hitler and also that they weren’t all mad and, even worse, that there but for the grace of God go I. The same is true for Israel and Zionism (even more so in my case since I have had (and still have) strong Zionist feelings. Am i a Zionist? Of course i’m not. Can I claim to be an anti-Zionist? Of course not.
Regarding consistency, you put your finger on an important point. I do lack it – in fact I’m a mass of contradictions. Well, that’s okay you can dismiss me as a crank. But the nagging difference between us is that I think you are also crammed full of contradictions – at least I hope you are because everyone is – you just don’t see it or don’t want to see it.
My own ability to emapthise was sorely tested by Dr Mathis and I wonder why? Was it because his opinions were so objectionable? I don’t think so. I think it was more my growing dismay at his whole approach to the process of having opinions and discussing them. Having said that, I miss him and sometimes really wish he was back.
So, it’s not whether deLiberation talks about this or that, it’s the absence of reflection that’s dragging it down.
Paul Eisen
June 9, 2012 at 9:02 am
Who_Me
I can’t seem to directly reply to your comment so I’ll do it here.
I’m specifically referring to the silencing of voices whether it be opinions, expressions etc. I’m not referring to any other kind of boycott.
who_me
June 9, 2012 at 2:16 pm
Paul Eisen
“I’m specifically referring to the silencing of voices whether it be opinions, expressions etc. I’m not referring to any other kind of boycott.”
i think we are pretty much in agreement, then. Though i wouldn’t call that boycotting, i would call it censorship.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 9, 2012 at 3:11 pm
PE: “Your comment is infused with the conviction that you are right and those you oppose are wrong. This seems to be the main difference between us.”
_____
Yes and No.
Yes, I am indeed convinced that that Israel needs to be exposed in any way possible and stopped, hampered in any way possible from beaming its confected image of ‘beauty’ which serves to obscure its criminal nature.
No, there is no difference between us in terms of our attitudes towards our own individual opinions, only in the content of those opinions. You are firmly convinced that the proper attitude is AMBIVALENCE, about which you are in fact almost… fanatical.
You describe it, rather appealingly I might add, as having empathy for “the feelings of others.”
I won’t take up space discussing the truism that every single one of us is “crammed full of contradictions.” Granted. I dispute, however, that in any of these discussions, I have shown myself unwilling “to see” my own contradictions, whatever they may be.
I do not believe that there is where the main difference between us lies, but the one I do see is not “nagging” at me at all. [What do you know, perhaps I "participate" in your feelings after all..]
The difference I see is this:
I approach the question of the cultural boycott of Israel as a concrete issue, depending on two questions:
–Should Israel be exposed; should the image it projects of itself be “delegitimized”?
–Is the cultural boycott a proper and effective way to do it?
For me the answer to both is YES.
You on the other hand say that you are conflicted on the whole issue of Israel because of lingering pro-zionist feelings and your capacity to “participate in the feelings of others.” You then lift the concrete issue at hand into the abstract realm, to a higher plane, as far as you are concerned: ambivalence, which becomes the olympian domain of the reflective and the ‘couth.’ The reflective ones can see from high up more of the field of conflict than the unreflective scufflers.
Nevertheless, the capacity to participate in the feelings of others is apparently not unlimited: you are “hugely suspicious” of people who “claim to have changed.”
So, people like Rob and Roy and many others must have either thrown reflection to the winds or are deceiving themselves.
I still find it odd that that you think that this site, which for ambivalence’ sake is nothing but talk, tossing ideas, debating them, is in danger of “absence of reflection which is dragging us back.”
What is reflection then? Permanent ambivalence on everything? Is it incompatible with having opinions, let alone firm opinions? Does reflection cast suspicion on those capable of changing their opinions because, I suppose, they change them for still other opinions instead of the hovering stance above all opinions?
You say: “my growing dismay at his whole approach to the process of having opinions and discussing them.” WOW!
A reflective process in the absence of opinions is not possible even in mathematics, Paul. You’d be flabbergasted to witness the heated debates they are capable of when disputing which of the demonstrations offers the most “elegant” solution.
fool me once...
June 10, 2012 at 12:46 am
Soak it up man, this is top dollar therapy for ya!
Roy Bard
June 8, 2012 at 7:17 pm
“my referring to it as a ‘movement’ is exactly what it’s looking like”
How?
Paul Eisen
June 8, 2012 at 9:36 pm
In the sense that a rather cosy consensus – generally anti-israel and anti-Jewish – is emerging – just like a ‘movement’.
Roy Bard
June 8, 2012 at 10:34 pm
on deLiberation!!!!! Who’d have thunk it?
The site was bound to attract those were anti-Israel and who are against the attempts to silence you and Gilad. But I don’t think you’ll find any kind of movement developing – even if the argument against cultural boycott hasn’t been won.
Here’s what Rachel Corrie wrote in February 2003:
And almost a decade on it’s even more urgent than it was then.
I have grave concerns about the way that BDS is developing and the way that it is dominated by groups like J-Big and signatories of the disavowal statement BUT at the end of the day it is time for Israeli’s to accept that Israel is not a nation just like any other nation, and thus I am pleased that they have to have added security to stage events that are seeking to promote the idea that they are a nation just like any other nation.
Whatever ‘beauty’ comes out of Israel is far outweighed by the ugliness of what continues to be done to the Palestinians.
Paul Eisen
June 9, 2012 at 9:08 am
Well i iknow many genuine anti-Zionists who have desperately tried to shut up Gilad and, to a lesser extent, myself and I’ve met quite a few Zionuist who seemed to genuinely favour open discourse.
I greatly admire the activism of people like Rachel Corrie but i didn’t think that was what deLiberation was about.
Regarding the ‘beauty’ or otherwise of Israel, i don’t know much about it other than to note that one of the huge strengths of the Zionist (and the Nazi) narrative has been it’s aesthetic appeal. How much of this is true and how much is cynically staged needs to be discussed.
Roy Bard
June 9, 2012 at 9:23 am
“I’ve met quite a few Zionuist who seemed to genuinely favour open discourse.”
They haven’t turned up here yet….
“I greatly admire the activism of people like Rachel Corrie but i didn’t think that was what deLiberation was about.”
But when actions against Israel are being discussed, then obviously activism does become relevant. I’m not sure what you think deLiberation is about – talking while Palestine burns perhaps?
Paul Eisen
June 9, 2012 at 9:40 am
Well, Dr Mathis never seemed to overtly try to stop the discourse (Having said that, I’m sure someone will find a quote to disprove this). Anyway, I’ve met lots of Zionists I liked very much and lots of anti-Zionists who I didn’t like at all.
I’ve never thought the conflict was between Zionist and anti-Zionist though I have spent a lot of time thinking about whether it’s about Jewish against anti-Jewish – no conclusions though.
What did I think deLiberation was about? I thought it was about reflective, open discourse. This is, of course, an ideal and unlikely to be realised but never mind.
Finally, we both do lots of things while Palestine burns as you put it, so why not talk?
Roy Bard
June 9, 2012 at 10:25 am
I don’t miss Dr. Mathis at all personally – he never struck me as genuine, nor refective, and in any case he strenuously denied being a zionist iirc.
“I’ve never thought the conflict was between Zionist and anti-Zionist though I have spent a lot of time thinking about whether it’s about Jewish against anti-Jewish – no conclusions though.”
I’m not sure what you mean by ‘the conflict’ here – obviously there is conflict between zionists and anti-zionists and between Jewish and anti-Jewish but if ‘the conflict’ involves Palestinians then its broader than both of those things.
“What did I think deLiberation was about? I thought it was about reflective, open discourse. This is, of course, an ideal and unlikely to be realised but never mind.”
These guys reckon it’s unlikely to happen. Only time will tell whether we can get to a stage where really reflective and open discourse occurs.
“Finally, we both do lots of things while Palestine burns as you put it, so why not talk?”
I probably have been doing more talking here than you have recently. But I agree whole-heartedly with the sentiment expressed by Rachel Corrie ie that we have to do something to make it stop. Talking isn’t enough.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 8, 2012 at 11:07 pm
“a rather cosy consensus – generally anti-israel and anti-Jewish – is emerging – just like a ‘movement’.
1. What is cozy about it?
2. Unless you have a fear of crowds (enochlophobia, all well-established phobias have Greek names), the only suspicious consensus is that established by group collusion with a nefarious purpose.
In and of itself consensus has no no positive or negative value. Unless one is an elitist and has distaste at the idea of being with the hoi-polloi (Greek again..)
Is ‘anti-Israeli and anti-Jewish’ OK in small doses with “balanced” opinion but dangerous when it looks like emerging consensus? Then it looks like a “movement” which invokes pogrom or what?
Enochlophobia
Paul Eisen
June 9, 2012 at 7:46 am
Maybe I do suffer from enochlophobia. I’ll certainly think about it. But are you suggesting that it’s connected with some ancestral fear of pogroms? I’ll think about that too.
Regarding ‘consensus’, I’m sure it’s quite wonderful when you’re building movements for activist purposes – I just find it gets a bit boring
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 9, 2012 at 4:03 pm
“Regarding ‘consensus’, I’m sure it’s quite wonderful when you’re building movements for activist purposes – I just find it gets a bit boring”
It is true that on this issue there is consensus (majority of opinion) on one side and a minority opinion represented by you, Gilad and Sarah.
That you find it boring is perhaps the reason you miss aema.
I could perhaps try to relieve your boredom. I can play aema.
As aema I would say that
“to boycott Habimah instead of boycotting, say, an Iranian movie or some other cultural manifestation coming out of a repressive Islamofascist state is to be an anti-semite pure and simple, one who naturally finds refuge on a site where a disgusting holocaust denier like you lurks.” Would that work?
Paul Eisen
June 9, 2012 at 5:10 pm
Dr Mathis! You’re back!
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 9, 2012 at 5:22 pm
They said I was unwelcome to return but I when I logged in I entered without difficulty and came back just to see if you came up with any new forms of poorly disguised anti-semitism. I find the same echo chamber where your half-brained Sturmfront followers are happy to play the Blame the Jew game under your protection.
fool me once...
June 9, 2012 at 8:50 pm
“I find the same echo chamber where your half-brained Sturmfront followers are happy to play the Blame the Jew game under your protection.”
Ha haa! Just as I thought. I knew you was too good to be true, all them brains, swashbuckling and everything.
After slipping in as a humble sackcloth commentator, you fought an impressive yet bogus battle against Mathis and co, post by post incrementally revealing your superior pen-sword skills, gaining trust and support.
After partaking in the unholy deLib daily bread, the throng would gather to watch you take to the bearpit and lay, not the mark of the yeast, but a thrice slice zio “Z”, zorro style, upon the foreheads of those who dared to duel, which pleased the crowd no end.
GPS were upstaged, losing the attention of the “followers” and conspired to cause a distraction to regain control by initiating a pretentious artistic pantomime. A scholarly semantic scrap ensued about the specialness of boycotted “beauty”, where ironically, GPS were relegated to the two ugly sisters and the panto Dame as they became more isolated and exposed, bleeding like a good ‘un. Little did they know that you were Mathis all along, the multiple personality disordered cybernet TimeLord, the diabolical Doktor Joo.
I salute you Dr, adieu!
.
PS who_me, you was right many posts ago when you warned us all, about zio profiling. Also, thanx for the heads up with “AT” when you answered the doktor’s profile probing question, in no uncertain terms on the “gay cure” thread;
May 28, 2012 at 3:44 am
“PS Do you live in CA?”
nope.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 9, 2012 at 9:26 pm
You are talking to the wrong person, fool me once, one that no longer exists. I disavow all my previous posts, written before I knew Truth.
If something I posted before seemed right to you it was by the same appointed accident by which a stopped clock tells the right time twice a day.
I was indifferently right but purposefully wrong for I was possessed.
Today I recited the exorcism prayer recommended on another thread. Not the new one concocted by the luciferians but the old one, and I was immediately seized by the exquisite liberating ecstasy described by St Theresa de Avilla, the same feeling wrongly attributed by mountain climbers to the combination of rarefied air and sips from the brandy container carried around their necks by man’s best friends, the St Bernards.
I now see through all of you. YOU too. You are doing Satan’s work, fool me once, and you shall pay for it.
Minds billions of synapses richer than mine have found the right path sooner but I am no T S Eliot, no Ezra Pound, so it took me a lifetime to find it.
Get thee behind me, Devil’s pawn!
who_me
June 9, 2012 at 10:28 pm
“Get thee behind me, Devil’s pawn!”
you sure you want him behind you? he listens to country music.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 9, 2012 at 10:31 pm
King of the Road? Randy Travis I abide.
fool me once...
June 9, 2012 at 11:08 pm
“Get thee behind me, Devil’s pawn!”
Surely you mean Devil’s spawn?
http://www.urbandictionary.com/define.php?term=Devil%27s%20Spawn
Now, with your newly acquired spiritually enlightened intellect can we expect to see you grab those who slew your master, firmly by the tabernacles. Farewell to the Labyrinth Lady and welcome to the Monstrance Martyr.
Your lair will also need updating. No more labyrinths, it’s gonna be catacombs from now on. You can reflect on the artworks there within and feel free to rant on to your hearts content, because the aforementioned artwork is BEAUTIFUL, Deus vobiscum
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Catacombs_of_Rome
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 7, 2012 at 3:27 pm
Sarah: “Gilad what you say about protecting the beauty, not the artist, is very clever. ”
Clever it is, I’ll grant you that. So clever it’s downright talmudic:
“i don’t mind stopping Israeli artist, but it is the beauty which i want to let free or protect”
This means,
Yes, I am all for stopping the artist but I want to protect the beauty bubbling inside him, ergo, I can’t in fact touch the artist.
But the artist exists in his environment, ergo I can’t touch the environment without affecting the artist, which ultimately endangers the beauty he is about to spew forth. I can’t touch a thing, I can only talk about it because any kind of action that by extension endangers beauty is the work of vandals, hooligans and worse– BDS.
Gilad Atzmon
June 8, 2012 at 12:53 am
Ariadna, it is indeed pretty sad you don’t see the difference between ‘Talmudic’ and ‘Germanic’ or between ‘beauty’ and ‘art’…
The meaning of my argument is simple, You want to stop the ‘artist’, you can try to boycott him or her, you can attempt to cancel their concerts (if it really excites you) but you don’t interfere with performance, you do not enter the concert hall in an attempt to stop the music of Brahms or Bach, you do not sabotage beauty. Is it really Talmudic? I don’t think so.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 8, 2012 at 2:52 pm
Yes, it is Talmudic: “Boycott the artist but only if you ca avoid the ‘sabotage’ of the beauty that’s gurgling in him, ready to flow.” Cut a pound of flesh but without spilling blood.
It’s also a twist on the ancient saying “Timeo Danaos ut dona ferentes”
—I fear the Israelis but not when they are bearing gifts of beauty.
“you can attempt to cancel their concerts (if it really excites you) but you don’t interfere with performance, you do not enter the concert hall in an attempt to stop the music of Brahms or Bach”
So you accept attempting to cancel their concert before it starts?! Weren’t you saying that is “herem”?!
Or is it only the notion of concertus interruptus that is too horrible to contemplate?
Sarah Gillespie
June 7, 2012 at 2:27 pm
Incidentally 3 days ago the the Israelis banned a performnace of Wagner schedulaed for the 18th June. Most of us realise the music is sublime but they brand it an nazi propaganda.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 7, 2012 at 3:11 pm
You are making my point.
Gilad Atzmon
June 8, 2012 at 1:03 am
What is your point Ariadna?, So far you sound like the exact mirror image of the Israeli.. They boycott and so are you, they sabotage beauty and so are you..What exactly transcend you beyond?
Interestingly enough, Otto Weininger had an insight, for him Wagner was the ‘ultimate Jew’, this might be the reason the Israelis hate him so much..:)
Jonathon Blakeley
June 7, 2012 at 9:10 pm
Its a obviously symbolic gesture to the germans, its a bit late to boycott the nazis. Most people agree Wager was a racist who inspired Hitler and co.
Wagner ‘s music I like a lot, does that make me a nazi racist.? I always wondered. Ugly people can make beautiful things , Beautiful people can make ugly things. Its all good.
I
searching
June 7, 2012 at 11:33 pm
Here is some music for you to listen to ,Jonathan.
I don’t know if it is Nazi or not.
I don’t particualary care. I like it.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YFXIyb0_cVs
Gilad Atzmon
June 8, 2012 at 1:07 am
Jonathon, have you read what Wagner wrote about the Jews? It actually very interesting.
The obsession of Jews and Israelis with Wagner is there to teach us that we have to learn to differentiate between the Artist and beauty, for some reason Araidna, on of the most astute persons on this outlet doesn’t grasp it at all,, is it really that complicated?
searching
June 8, 2012 at 1:15 am
Sorry to say it Gilad ,and no offence to you, but it is not Ariadna, who does not “grasp it at all”.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 8, 2012 at 1:48 am
Let me begin with a smile:
GA: “for some reason Ariadna […} doesn’t grasp it at all”
___
I will not say the same thing back to you because I don’t believe it.
I know you grasp what I am saying and you also know that it is not because what you propose is “complicated” but because I do not agree that I don’t “flinch.”
I think you simply need to accommodate your preset “red line.”
1. I don’t give a hoot, nor do I think anyone should, “what Wagner wrote about the Jews.” His music is ART, not propaganda.
People who really appreciate music (even AZZs are prone to melomania!) recognize that what you produce is art, irrespective of whether they hate what you say.
The fact that Israel is banning Wagner’s music does not make me hesitate to approve the boycotting of a traveling Israeli theater group selling zioprop as ordered by the Minister of Culture.
I liked “Carmen” since I first saw it as a child. I have not changed my opinion because I later heard that Hitler liked it too and made an exception of Bizet (a Jew).
I have come to accept that the distinction I (not that I have invented it, there are whole libraries about it) make between art and propaganda (and art and kitsch, which would merit separate discussion at one point) is not one you will, or can afford to, accept, as it crosses the “red line” you have drawn.
It does not lessen my appreciation of your stupendous mind or even your overall judgment. So, we disagree on this one.
Gilad Atzmon
June 8, 2012 at 11:24 am
AT: “People who really appreciate music (even AZZs are prone to melomania!) recognize that what you produce is art, irrespective of whether they hate what you say.”
G: Darlind, once again, …. we don’t ‘produce’ art, we produce beauty, this applies to Wagner, Sarah, myself and other so called ‘artists’ …to compose a symphony is to produce beauty, that beauty may become art or not..
AT: The fact that Israel is banning Wagner’s music does not make me hesitate to approve the boycotting of a traveling Israeli theater group selling zioprop as ordered by the Minister of Culture.
G: This is acceptable.. however, i am different, i left Israel because i opposed Hasbara, indoctrination and talmudic ‘herem’ and i have serious problems with this strategies. HOWEVER, being an open person I respect and support the boycott and even academic and cultural campaign but clearly refrain from sabotage,,, this is a red line for me..
AT: I have come to accept that the distinction I (not that I have invented it, there are whole libraries about it) make between art and propaganda (and art and kitsch, which would merit separate discussion at one point) is not one you will, or can afford to, accept,
G: I don’t ve a problem with you maintaining such a distinction.,, yet operating from an aesthetic perspective, this distinction is meaningless for me. The only thing i am concerned with it beauty, i ve said it now 50 times… propaganda or Levis advert may be beautiful, i then may criticise its political or commercial aspect but enjoy the beauty of it like in the case of Eisenstein..or some Levis adverts..
this is the most meaningful distinction,,, it would allow us to enjoy a great music yet be genuine and coherent politically..
AT: as it crosses the “red line” you have drawn.
It does not lessen my appreciation of your stupendous mind or even your overall judgment. So, we disagree on this one.
G: This is exactly the platform to explore disagreements
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 7, 2012 at 3:10 pm
Sarah,
)
1. We don’t need “a new reality” whatever that means
2. If the “shift in semantics” is radical enough and we each practice our own we will be speaking to each other like the characters in Ionesco’s play The Chairs
3. The brief history of artistic creativity from ancient Rome to Renaissance was cute. (I had never heard of “genus” before except in biology, will have to look it up, unless it is your own breakthrough in semantics
4. I admire Gilad tremendously but I don’t expect him to liberate us from “systems of knowledge from the Enlightenment,” not only because it is a tall order but also because it has been done (except arguably in spots in the US) …
I know you mean well. No, you are not “sounding like a horoscope-reading hippy moron”–you are just overeager. It is your boundless energy and enthusiasm that contribute to making you the artist you are.
searching
June 7, 2012 at 3:33 pm
I get an impression that Gilad and Sarah are operating in one , known only for themselves and other “artists” dimension, while we, average, not “artisticly “inclined, mortals are hanging in another dimension, of a lower kind I may add.
We, the mortals ,without “genus” guiding our pitiful spirit, operate in a pragmatic, realistic , down-to-earth terms, they , who have “genus” that took permanent residence in their uplifted spirit, operate in a somewhat idelistic, un/above earthly, sky high zone.
Hence, lack of understanding and problems with communication.
Gilad Atzmon
June 8, 2012 at 11:28 am
Actually, you don’t have to be an artist in order to understand it all, Kant wasn’t an artist. it is all very simpe,, all our creative judgments are driven by one factor, ‘is it beautiful or is it not..’
searching
June 8, 2012 at 2:49 pm
Gilad, I have an impression that we are going in circles.
Is it some kind of a “cleansing ritual” that you are dragging me through?
-”here we go ’round the mullberry bush,a mullbery bush…so early in the morning.
-art is a beauty. that’s what I say, that’s what I say….so early in the morning.
-I don’t agree here is a proof, I don’t agree here is a proof…..so early in the morning…
-Kant wasn’t an artist, but that’s what he said, that’s what he said….sp early in the mornin…
-But I don’t care what Kant have said.what Kant have said….so early in the mornnig..
-we don’t boycott art that’s what I say, that what I say….so early in the morning
-we boycott olives and avocados and avocados …so early in the morning
and so on.
Interesting thing for me is that you say “art is about beauty”, which is a very general statement meaning “ALL art is about beauty”, and when confronted you say,” oh, it is just about me, I create a beauty that maybe called an art.”
That is my main problem. You do create beautiful music, that is called an art,
but NOT ALL artists have beauty in mind when they create something ,and not all art is about beauty. Sometimes is quite the opposite.
So here is my problem that we are trying (or not) to resolve.
Now we can start on “what is beauty”?
searching
June 8, 2012 at 3:02 pm
btw for those who have not seen it yet.
Here is a true work of art.
Worth watching.
A Russian movie (english sub), “The Island” (Ostrov).
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HehNS7zfnA4
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 8, 2012 at 3:11 pm
Can you please give me again the link where one propaganda painting (Soviet soldiers liberating Minks?) was copied, with only wardrobe and background changes and made another propaganda painting– US soldiers liberating Baghdad? I can’t find it and would like to save the link. Thanks.
Jay Knott
June 8, 2012 at 4:55 pm
Soviet soldiers liberated Minsk. Animal rights activists liberate Minks.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 8, 2012 at 6:08 pm
Sorry
Jay Knott
June 8, 2012 at 7:35 pm
In the case of Minks, they die in the wild, but at least they have a taste of freedom. Unlike Minsk.
Somoe
June 7, 2012 at 3:31 pm
In my humble opinion one would have to say that Israel is both operating Lebensraum policy AND Apartheid. I agree with Roy that the definition of conditions of apartheid are in existence in Israel and that means it must be considered to be so. The reason it is important that both be recognised as the conditions in effect, is that Germany and South Africa were both vilified internationally and action taken to change their behaviour and attitudes. Perhaps the labels are unimportant but at the same time precedents have been set in both cases. Their actions were believed to be wrong and boycotts and sanctions or in the case of Germany,(rightly or wrongly, depending on perspective) military action brought to bear.
The words ‘Never Again’ were coined to remind future generations of the horrors to be ever vigilant for. Sadly tho’, it appears the ziorun western msm has pulled the wool over the eyes of the consumer sheep it helped to create and we have watched it happen over and over again to others across the world in the name of freedom and democracy, which were complete lies.
In both cases, SA and Germany, the suffering experienced by the oppressed was arguably not as horrific as those suffered by the Palestinians who are being subjected to much worse as the 2 abhorrent systems are combined to create a unique and hellish existence for them… Clearly we need a new term that covers the escalated atrocities that Israel is guilty of.
It is true that we in these western countries need to overthrow our morally bankrupt governments that take their filthy bribes and incentives from JP, before we will see a significant shift in policy because it is patently obvious that they are happy to do as Israel wants, as befits a ‘friend’. People must take ownership of this attempt to isolate Israel and that also means publicly exposing and shaming our corrupt politicians who are Friends of Israel.
How to break the stronghold the ziorun msm has over the minds of the masses? This has to be the question – because as long as they continue to pump their propaganda into peoples’ heads, they have them under control and the likelihood of regime change ever distant.
searching
June 7, 2012 at 3:52 pm
“How to break the stronghold the ziorun msm has over the minds of the masses?”
Boycott, boycott. I know it ain’t happen but this is the only solution. But people are too adicted to their virtual reality. Many CAN NOT function without it. Actually for many , a real life become an ADDITION to a virtual life.
Virtual life, projeced throuth TV, Internet, video games, I-phones etc. is becoming A SUBSTITUTE of a real deal.
A virtual life is more interesting, more exciting, more fun. A younger generation is totally immersed in it.
Also, we got so used to seeing everything what is possible to see, all gore and blood, violence, aggresion, rape , sodomy etc ,on the Media, that it almost becomes something that doesn’t make any impression on us. It just happens, and untill it doesn’t concern us personally, or our close ones, we are basically indifferent to it.
We are curious to see the details though. And that’s about it. We became immune to what is going on around the world, we ‘ve become immune to what is going on around us. We became immune to our own feelings, thoughts, Not too mention actions.
Our spirits are in a CONSTANT coma, and a major device ,that supplies this daily ,anesthetic drug ,is a mass media.
And we willingly give up our spirits, souls for this poisonous drip. We are mass media addicts, and nobody seems to have a problem with it.
Even though it destroys our spirits.
Laura Stuart
June 7, 2012 at 4:07 pm
Searching what do you think about this project ?
http://www.jrmip.org/?page_id=2
3.3 million Jews can change the life of 40 million Poles’
The founding wish of the JRMiP is to write new pages into a history that never quite took the course we wanted. We call for the return of 3.300.000 Jews to Poland to symbolize the possibility of our collective imagination – to right the wrongs history has imposed and to reclaim the promise of a utopian future that all citizens deserve.
searching
June 7, 2012 at 4:28 pm
If the Poles, who were murdered, killed,jailed ,tortured, dispossesed, sent forcefully to kazachstan , syberia etc. ,thanks to jew-bolshevics politcs , all POles who were killed by Nazis(+ zionism) and Communists ( + jews )
are brought back to life, or at least the families of all of those, who sufferd tremendously because of it, are handsomly rewarded big billions of $$$ by Israel and diaspora Jews ,then …we may start talking about the subject.
who_me
June 7, 2012 at 7:30 pm
are you jewish, searching?
searching
June 7, 2012 at 7:36 pm
why should I be??
who_me
June 7, 2012 at 7:53 pm
i did ask if you should be jewish, searching, just if you were.
searching
June 7, 2012 at 8:07 pm
are you?
who_me
June 7, 2012 at 8:17 pm
thought so.
searching
June 7, 2012 at 8:27 pm
thought what and why?
and are you Jewish btw?
fool me once...
June 8, 2012 at 2:54 am
@searching
I thought you was a highly moral, disgruntled catholic warrior nun, selflessly engaging in a daily death clinch with the Dark Lord, occasionally pausing to warn us sinners of our impending doom?! The deLib soothsayer in residence, if you please.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=oc_x2-rCFWI
Not that it would make the slightest difference to anything, but is who_me correct, about er, you know?
searching
June 8, 2012 at 2:57 am
what you think of me is not too much of my interest.
Trust me, I don’t think of you too much.
I have bigger worries.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 8, 2012 at 3:03 am
Not that there is anything wrong with it, right?
searching
June 8, 2012 at 3:14 am
fool me once. I wrote it already, but I will repeat myself for your own sake.
When God’s and natural laws are replaced with satanic laws, not only christians/catholics will suffer.
The whole civilisation will be doomed.
And we are on a straight road to it.
Who will eternaly condemnded??
That’s not for me to say and decide.
Lucky for you, I may add.
I have to worry about my own soul, you worry about yours. OK ?
who_me
June 8, 2012 at 3:17 am
the old searching:
http://d1466nnw0ex81e.cloudfront.net/iss/600w/229/162291/5684011_1.jpg
is transformed into the new searching:
http://www.amazigh-voice.com/Amazigh-Woman.jpg
if the links work this time.
fool me once...
June 8, 2012 at 3:56 am
“I don’t think of you “too much”.”
At least you don’t try and freeze me out unlike some 
Aah, that’s nice x
fool me once...
June 8, 2012 at 4:09 am
“the old searching:…” Nice find who_me. The warrior nun would make a great avatar for searching don’t ya think? Maybe JB could give it a trial in searching’s box?
who_me
June 8, 2012 at 4:25 am
“Maybe JB could give it a trial in searching’s box?”
who_me
June 8, 2012 at 4:28 am
searching
“When God’s and natural laws are replaced with satanic laws, not only christians/catholics will suffer.”
i’m curious. don’t catholics regard themselves as christians? and protestants as something other than christian?
who_me
June 7, 2012 at 7:29 pm
that “beauty” also creates death and destruction, greed and pain.
searching
June 7, 2012 at 7:43 pm
art can serve “beauty”, and it can serve “non-beauty”. It is ,as always, a matter of choice.
As most of the things in life.
Art,artists are no exception.
Who guides your spirit?? Who is your Master??
Whom do you serve? Who pays you??
What is the purpouse of your creation?
Jonathon Blakeley
June 7, 2012 at 9:16 pm
Boycott all Israeli Culture/ Goods/ Services and Israel friendly companies and organizations. Name and Shame Israeli collaborators.
STOP ISRAEL .>> START PALESTINE.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 8, 2012 at 6:02 pm
I would frame statement you made above.
Daniel Mabsout
June 7, 2012 at 10:27 pm
The point is to preserve the identity of the people and their relation to the land and to the occupiers . They should not boycott that. Once they give up or lose the fact of their occupation, they lose their identity and therefore they are finished . We are against boycott as a means and strategy because it is a dangerous ommission of occupation. Even if we boycott each and every item, that boycott will not free us from the occupier . But then and also we are buying electricity from the occupier should we boycott electricity ? Why should we relieve the occupier from its duties towards the occupied
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 8, 2012 at 2:31 pm
So, in brief it is really very simple:
–Boycotting Israel’s cultural emissaries is only something vandals can do, because they are fonts out of which Beauty spews forth. We should (a) enjoy the Beauty they bring; (b) critique it later, based on the recommended reading material (Kant, which took Gilad one year to understand but is really very simple). Doing this allows you to be coherent politically.
–A mass movement is a debating society whose proceedings are published in deLiberation. You may call this a “campaign” if you wish.
– Hasbara is often wrapped in Beauty. It should first be enjoyed as Beauty, then criticized as the product of JP. If it is too overpowering, you should emigrate.
_____________________
Quotes:
” i don’t mind stopping Israeli artist, but it is the beauty which i want to let free or protect…This would imply that we keep the J vandals out of the gallery, theatre and the concert hall..but campaigning is totally kosher..”
The only thing i am concerned with it beauty, i ve said it now 50 times… propaganda or Levis advert may be beautiful, i then may criticise its political or commercial aspect but enjoy the beauty of it this is the moste coherent approach: it would allow us to enjoy a great music yet be genuine and coherent politically
you don’t have to be an artist in order to understand it all, Kant wasn’t an artist. it is all very simple….. ……………it took me a year to understand
i left Israel because i opposed Hasbara
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 8, 2012 at 2:31 pm
Correction:
Boycotting Israel’s cultural emissaries is only something vandals can do, because the Israeli emissaries are fonts out of which Beauty spews forth.
Ariadna Theokopoulos
June 8, 2012 at 2:35 pm
and here’s the … other kind of beauty:
http://uprootedpalestinians.blogspot.com/2012/06/beauty-and-beast.html
searching
June 8, 2012 at 3:20 pm
You don’t mess up with an art and artists.
They are ALWAYS about beauty. They are given a “genus” that we , an average, lowly mortals have no right to touch or vandalise.
We may vandalise a tomato or banana, but never , ever , under no circumstances the ART, ( and its messangers aka artists), who is always about beauty.
Talking about privilige, chosenness and tribal loyalty.
Sorry Gilad , you did convince me otherwise.
We ESPECIALLY should boycott art and academics becasue their job has a greater impact on the whole.
A plain olive or ahava cream does not 1/10000 of a damage than a pro-Zionim artist or academia mamber does prmoting his almighty state of israel and its ideology.
Paul Eisen
June 8, 2012 at 5:47 pm
To Jonathon:
I can’t see to reply to your comment but if you do decide to frame it perhaps you’ll remember to correct the typo. Many thanks.
To Searching:
I can’t seem to reply to you either but I assume you’re being ironic so in the same spirit:
Let’s root it all out!
Let nothing remain!