Newsgroup: it.politica.internazionale
Titolo: Who's the extremist?

http://www.ynetnews.com/articles/0,7340,L-3677628,00.html
Who's the extremist?
History shows that 'extremists' can be right while majority can be
wrong
Yoel Meltzer
As coalition talks heat up, the phrase "extremist coalition" is
frequently heard. At times it is Kadima stating that it will not join
an extremist coalition, while at other times it is the leadership of
the Likud saying it will form a right-wing coalition, albeit not an
extremist one. With the term being bantered about so regularly,
perhaps it should be clarified.
For starters, according to one dictionary, "extremist" means "one who
advocates or resorts to measures beyond the norm." Hence, right from
the start, it should be clear that "extremist" is a relative term.
Moreover, something is deemed extremist only in relation to its
position vis-à-vis the "norm" (which of course is also a relative
term.)
Thus, for example, we find that according to this definition Zeev
Jabotinsky's frantic pleas in the 1930s to European Jewry "to
liquidate the exile before the exile liquidates them," would certainly
be considered extremist, since the majority of European Jewry (the
"norm") did not agree with Jabotinsky's prediction. Nonetheless,
history proved that he was unfortunately correct while the majority
was clearly wrong.
This is just one example of many to show that what occasionally is
considered as an extremist approach is in retrospect correct, while
what is considered the norm is in retrospect mistaken. Of course this
is not a fixed law and sometimes the opposite is true. What is
important, however, is to understand that these terms are purely
subjective and relative. Thus, whoever designates an idea or approach
as extremist is doing so from his own personal subjective point of
view. This is an important point that should be kept in mind when
confronted by such terms.
A much healthier approach would be for public officials to clearly
state what they consider as extremist in another party, and why, and
in the process clarify what is their own unique worldview. Thus, for
example, if Kadima or Likud were to state why they believe that
Yisrael Beiteinu's calls for citizenship based on loyalty are
extremist, perhaps Yisrael Beiteinu would respond with its own
reasoning of why it believes that such position is legitimate and
required. Whatever the outcome of such dialogue would be, at the very
least the public would be presented with some clear ideas of what our
public officials actually believe in, rather than being fed the usual
clichés.
'Uncompromising policies'
Turning to another dictionary, we find that extremism is "any
political theory favoring uncompromising policies." Thus, for example,
based on this definition Kadima could easily claim that National Union
has an extremist point of view since it is 100% opposed to the
creation of a Palestinian state, in any shape or size, in any part of
the Land of Israel. In other words, it is totally uncompromising and
therefore extremist.
However, similarly to the case above, if Kadima would only state this
clearly, rather than talking in general terms about an extremist
coalition, perhaps some genuine public dialogue would ensue. In such a
scenario, National Union might respond by saying that Kadima's
determination to establish a Palestinian state in the majority of
Judea and Samaria, despite the experience of missile attacks from
Lebanon and Gaza during the past few years and despite the direct
threat that such state would pose against Tel Aviv and Jerusalem, is
not only foolish but is also extremist due to Kadima's uncompromising
commitment to bring such a policy to fruition.
Or perhaps it would respond by explaining in an intelligent way that
from a Jewish perspective its position is actually the norm, while
everything else should be viewed relative to this position.
The debates could go on and on, but the point here is that rather than
continuing to spend endless time delegitimizing and vilifying other
parties that have different points of view, the time has come for
Israeli pubic officials to start engaging in real discussions based
upon actual ideas and approaches, rather than mere sound bites and
clichés such as "extremist." Israelis deserve this from their elected
officials.

 wrong
quoto
giovannino brigatista