In article <1t6aqj$odv@cville-srv.wam.umd.edu> aap@wam.umd.edu (Alberto Adolfo Pinkas) writes: >In article <2BF69FC7.2150@news.service.uci.edu> tclock@orion.oac.uci.edu (Tim Clock) writes: >> >>Try coming up with your own definition of any or all "self-hating" peoples. >>To me, any who reject their culture to the point where they *only* see the >>absolute negatives of that culture (generally, or regarding a particular >>event) and accept *only* those views purely opposing aspects of that culture  >>(thus, selective belief in/use of historical facts and a complete ignoring >>of "context" results) "hate" their culture.  > >I believe that things are getting mixed here. >Critizicing Israel and/or being anti-zionist is not seeing "the absolute  >negatives of that culture".   If that "culture" referred to is Israeli, being anti-zionist can be seen as a complete denial of that entity's right to exist and its "legitimacy".  Just as saying that Islam has *no right* to establish and implement a  "state" that includes any non-muslims, both are *absolute*, one-dimensional  views of that culture with regard to the issue of "state".  >Maybe, because a person can see the positives  >of that culture is that that person opposes zionism and the actions of the >State of Israel.  If that were the case, one would expect a few of that culture's positives to be discussed with regard to the issue at hand. Since the issue *centers* on Israeli culture, I have yet to hear of *any* positives of that culture in this discussion.  >I, for one, consider the actions of the State of Israel with respect to >the human rights of the Palestinian people as an example of an action thaty >opposes what Jewish culture was suppose to uphold as an example of  >respect and what the Jewish people learned about oppresion, segregation and >years in the diaspora.  I agree with you. But I also feel that when a culture feels it is confronted  by another group that wishes to see that culture "disassembled", the first culture has little choice but to *try* to secure its "survival" as well as maintain its moral center. Since the culture is not about to turn away from *either* the matter of its survival or the valuing of its moral  principles, it has the virtually impossible job of "balancing".   To discuss Israel's faults and "crimes" without *any* recognition of this circumstance and *reality* it faces is a conscious decision based on the  discussant's political biases, NOT on an honest and empathetically open  understanding of the situation. The same applies to those who attempt to  paint the Palestinian movement as "all bad" and dispense with considerations  of the *reality* facing them. > >>That certainly describes Elias,  >>since he has no intention of recognizing that, alongside the Palestinian >>experience and perspective, there exists also that of Israelis.  > >He might not want to recognize that. It does not make him a self-hating >Jew, as far as I see it. At most, he is a person who is not telling >the truth.  You beg the question by centering on the symptoms while the issue of "self-hating" addresses the motivations. I certainly feel that anyone who expends so much effort inflating, distorting and robbing human context from aspects of his/her own culture is reflecting a degree of dislike for it. Since bits of that culture are bound,  due to his/her upbringing, to be a part of him/her, a bit of self- dislike seems likely to be mixed in somewhere. >>>> >>>>    "Who is a Jew?  A person whose integrity decays when unmoved  >>>>    by the knowledge of wrong done to other people."  >>>>                                                   A. J. Heschel >>> >>>That is why I get moved when I see the Israeli Army killing people in  >>>the Occupied Territories as much as I get moved when I see a Plestinian >>>stabing people in Israel. >>> >>And, this is precisely why Israeli society has been tremendously harmed >>by the actions it (its government) has *felt it had to take* in response >>to an "other" perceived as a threat. Just as with you, there has long  >>been a strident and emotional debate about the pain Israelis feel when  >>forced to "balance" desires for survival and moral beliefs. The trauma >>of having to make that choice is made worse by the fact that neither >>can be conveniently brushed aside (as a result of a reasoned political >>debate) for the sake of the other, only reshaped.  >> > >But, so far, it seems that the blame is always put on "the other". >If you read this newsgroup, for example, Israel is never guilty by >herself. She is always responding to the actions of the "other", and >it goes as if the actions of Isreal do not also affect the response >of the "other' in a cycle that never ends. Also, there is blindness to >try to understand what the other feels and why.  As you well know, this process of *blaming the other* for the morally questionable actions one side is forced (by the "other", of course) to  take is thoroughly practiced by **both sides**. If you are only hearing the pro-Israeli crowd's self-supporting arguments, that may be due to the fact that you are not listening for anything else. *I* certainly hear the similarly distorting pro-Palestinian/pro-Arab element in *this* newsgroup (as well as in soc.culture.arabic).  >There is always and excuse. There is always a rationale to explain why >things happen as they do. And, what is the worst part for me, there  >seems to be all the time an intention to try to de-humanize the "other",  >as if the other did not care about their future, children, peace, etc, etc. > >AAP  I agree, agree, agree, agree.  However, in my response to the initial discussion above between Davidsson and those opposing his presentations, I saw Davidsson carefully putting  academic frills around a blatantly one-sided series of I-hate/dislike- "them", yesIdo,yesIdo,yesIdo. I did *not* find the approach of those  opposing Davidsson to be centered *at all* on a denigration and denial of the "other side".   I certainly do wonder if the degree to which Davidsson's views on the  Middle East have distorted is connected to his dislike and rejection of his jewish lineage. Having said this, however, I agree with you that  this constant accusing others of being "self-hating" jews seems pointless. It is not worse a label than is "why, you're on their side", except to perhaps imply a certain degree of overly enthusiastic  biasedness.  Tim