https://buy-zithromax.online buy kamagra usa https://antibiotics.top buy stromectol online https://deutschland-doxycycline.com https://ivermectin-apotheke.com kaufen cialis https://2-pharmaceuticals.com buy antibiotics online Online Pharmacy vermectin apotheke buy stromectol europe buy zithromax online https://kaufen-cialis.com levitra usa https://stromectol-apotheke.com buy doxycycline online https://buy-ivermectin.online https://stromectol-europe.com stromectol apotheke https://buyamoxil24x7.online deutschland doxycycline https://buy-stromectol.online https://doxycycline365.online https://levitra-usa.com buy ivermectin online buy amoxil online https://buykamagrausa.net

Of historic prejudice and modern geopolitics

This is an interesting story about a school and its banning of a club focused on human rights and affiliating with Amnesty International.

But more interesting to me is the (not unique) conflation in the story between (a) criticism of Israel and/or support of the Palestinian Arabs with (b) anti-Semitism and hatred of Jews.

Now, I will admit that I am not Jewish, so this gives me a different perspective than, I would suppose, some folk who are. But it seems to me that Judaism, Zionism, and the contemporary policies of the government of Israel are, in fact, three distinct things, and one can criticize different elements of those without criticizing or condemning all of them.

Thus, it seems possible to disagree that there needs to be a Jewish homeland (Zionism) without it being an attack on Jews as a religion or an ethnic group (or a combination thereof). Or, more germanely, it is possible to criticize the policy of the government of Israel without being against the idea of a Jewish state.

Or, rather, let's frame it a different way. It is possible to criticize the policies of the government of the United States (from at home or abroad) without challenging the existence of a nation called the United States, or the people who call themselves American. One can, for example, critique historic or present actions and policies toward Native American groups without by implication calling for the United States to be abolished.

(That there are those who would, to follow the example, suggest that past offenses against Native Americans means that the US should cede sovereignty over significant parts of its territory does not mean that all criticism about Native American policy of the United States leads to the same conclusion. Similarly, that there are those who believe that all Israeli territory is theft from Palestinian Arabs and that therefore the state of Israel should be destroyed does not mean that any criticism of Israeli policy or support of Palestinian rights is per se an attack on the state of Israel or on Judaism.)

A student club that calls for the extermination of the Jews is rightfully banned from existence. A student club that aligns with an organization that supports the rights of Palestinian Arabs is not at all the same thing; making it out to be so is intellectually dishonest, and not worthy of an educational institution, even if someone sends them a nasty letter about it.




A New Albany High School Bans Amnesty International – The Atlantic
The rise of illiberal norms and the weakening of free speech continues to undermine the very causes valued by the American left.

View on Google+

52 view(s)  

5 thoughts on “Of historic prejudice and modern geopolitics”

  1. I don't get why the club is being abolished. Why not let students with bad ideas form and use it as a learning opportunity? Just abolishing the club doesn't abolish those bad ideas.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *