From: hallam@zeus02.desy.de (Phillip M. Hallam-Baker)
Subject: Re: Yitzhak Rabin, another the self-hating Jew
Reply-To: hallam@zeus02.desy.de
Organization: DESY ZEUS Central Data Acquisition
Date: Mon, 17 Aug 1992 12:15:59 GMT

In article <1992Aug15.120056.29727@discus.technion.ac.il>,
davidba@carmel.technion.ac.il (David Ben_Ami) writes:
|>In article <22196@venera.isi.edu> arens@ISI.EDU (Yigal Arens) writes:
|>>[Comments in square brackets are mine - Yigal]
|>>
|>>From "The OTHER Front", July 29, 1992.  Translation of Ha'aretz
|>article.

|>This is indeed unfortunate and has many reasons
|>some of them security-connected which have sound basis (whatever Yigal
|>and his fellow anti Zionists will say) and many from prejudice and
|>stereotypes
|>that roam the Jewish public as it roams Whites in the USA and many
|>other
|>people - this should be eliminated and ALL governments declared that
|>Equality 
|>is very important. Of course many of these declerations were
|>lip-service
|>as is the current one by Rabin (IMHO).
|>
|>This is not racism per se. This is nationalism (as the Arabs are from
|>the same race, and no one condemns Arab for their racial features).

Since the term "Racism" was originaly coined to describe the theory of
Hitler and his Ilk which claimed such a difference existed between the
Jewish and Aryan "races" the application of the term is dependent on the
mindset of the racist, not on whether the groups concerned are indeed
from separate races or not. 

The test of language is whether the concepts it embodies are usefull or
not. There is no practical difference between those that hate black
people simply because they are black or those that hate Jews simply
because they are Jews or arabs simply because they are arabs. 

If you chose to define your terms such that the term racism is only
applicable to the case when one group of people oppresses another we
would have to abandon the memory of the Holocaust as the paramount
symbol of the evils of racism. Is there anyone left prepared to defend
the principle that heredity is what defines human worth? It was the
extreeme of this principle that allowed mass murderers to beleive that
they were performing a service to humanity through the elimination of
"undesirable" genetic types.

|>I never said that Arabs enjoy full equality in Israel - they have formal
|>equality - much the same as the Blacks have in America. There are many
|>laws that discrimiante Jews affirmatively, such as the Law of Return.
|>The raison d'etre of this is: Jews have been denied a State for 2000
|>years and must be compensated.

"Affirmative action" is only justified in case where a group of people
are willing to make ammends for those they oppressed. In the case of the
desendants of US slaves or those formerly exploited in British colonies
this case is clear. When the majority population group in control of the
entire system of government decide that they need "affirmative action"
in order to rectify wrongs done to their forebears the rationalisation
is transparent.

|>Well, I think the dangers are not fictitious as this journalist imply,
|>I think that if Arabs should be trusted to these commities they should
|>also serve in the army. Most of them won't hear of the latter not even
|>in the mildest form (service in Arab municipal and hospitals) so their
|>complaints seem a little hypoctical.

Since the necessity for conscription is caused by the maximalist and
expansionist aims of Shamir et al there is legitimate reason to object
to participating. 

The racism behind David's position is now clear, he beleives that "the
arabs" consitute a group such that lack of trustworthyness on the part
of one member is enough to damn them all. Now the reason for the
carefull semantic definition of racism becomes plain, he wants to
indulge in racist attitudes without admiting that he is racist.

At the end of the day you can chose any name you like for the idea that
some people should be allowed more rights than others because they
belong to a different ethnic group. I'll still call it racism and I'll
still be against it.


Phill Hallam-Baker