********************  POSTING RULES & NOTES  ********************
#1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message.
#2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived.
#3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern.
*****************************************************************

On Thu, March 5, 2015 17:51, Ken Hiebert via Marxism wrote:
>
> Some scattered comments.

Most of Ken's comments were welcome, but the following segment has left me
rather confused:

> The question of our relationship with one strand of right- wing
> "anti-Zionism" was posed sharply at the AGM of the Palestine Solidarity
> Campaign in the UK at the beginning of 2012.
>
> http://site.lalkar.org/article/566/palestinesolidarity-movement-on-the-defensive-as-agm-votes-for-zionist-formulations
> The meeting voted to endorse a paragraph that the PSC executive had
> recently added to the campaign website stating that “Any expression of
> racism or intolerance, or attempts to deny or minimise the Holocaust have
> no place in our movement. Such sentiments are abhorrent in their own right
> and can only detract from the building of a strong movement in support of
> the fundamental rights of the Palestinian people.” (My emphasis)`

Perhaps just a bit of context was missing, but it wasn't clear if Ken
posted the above link in approval or otherwise. The quoted policy
statement looked perfectly good to me, but the article pointed to (of the
journal Lalkar, apparently connected to the CPGB-ML, neither of which was
I familiar with) took issue with the statement. The underlined text, lost
as it got sent by email, was "attempts to deny or minimise the Holocaust"
and the Lalkar article laments that "they voted to give the PSC’s
executive the ability to discipline and expel sincere and useful
solidarity activists for committing a ‘crime’ that exists only in the
zionist imagination – the crime of ‘minimising the holocaust’." I trust
that this is NOT Ken's view!

[Just as a point of list procedure, I'd expect that if a quotation or link
is introduced without any introduction or disclaimer, then the poster is
generally agreeing with it or at least introducing it as a source of
useful information.]

Without denying the holocaust, the article in Lalkar implies that the
formula of "minimization" was vague enough that it could be misused. Well,
almost any rule can be misused, but the spirit of the above statement is
certainly on the mark.

I had mentioned in an earlier post that the Dutch Palestine Committee
(NPK) has a strict policy against displays at demos which are even vaguely
antisemitic. Cynics dismiss that as motivated solely by the fact that
antisemitism doesn't look good. Well no, it doesn't look good, because it
ISN'T good, and it isn't who we are. I don't think it is the
responsibility of Palestinians or their supporters to concentrate on
fighting antisemitism, which is already discredited in most mainstream
circles (at least officially). But it is our responsibility to clean up
our own quarters when it becomes infected with racist filth. And a
positive by-product of that policy happens to be that some right-wingers
who (as I have argued) may act as friends of Palestine but only due to
their antisemitism, will find themselves unwelcome.

But on a more subtle note, I was also surprised that the demo policy also
prohibited signs comparing the Nazi's to the Israeli government, such as
drawing the flag of Israel with a swastika on it, or a Hitler mustache on
Netanyahu. I disagreed, because surely there ARE parallels between the
Zionists and the Nazi's, and making such a comparison, even when
inaccurate, surely doesn't qualify as "anti-semitism." However I came to
learn that the point of the policy is to avoid the debate shifting away
from Israel to the holocaust, in which the Zionists could arguably claim
that the crimes of the Nazis were far beyond anything that Israel has ever
been accused of, at least in terms of scale. That's an opening for the
Zionists' favorite game: justifying anything they do with endless
references to the holocaust. Accepting the terms of that debate, the
crimes of Israel will appear secondary until the Palestinian death toll
approaches 6 million (i.e. all of them), so it's a terrible reference
point.

- Jeff








_________________________________________________________
Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm
Set your options at: 
http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com

Reply via email to