Go Ahead and Admit It. Say You're "Pro-Palestinian." Just See Where It Gets You.

Martin Peretz must find it galling that Matthew Yglesias gets more comments on one post on his blog than The New Republic can manage in an entire day. The only thing getting smaller and smaller round here is the influence of The New Republic and its demented Editor-in-Chief.

So in other words, ND, you approve of Jews sans frontieres.

"Martin Peretz must find it galling that Matthew Yglesias gets more comments on one post on his blog than The New Republic can manage in an entire day."

What an odd observation! You don't need to be a paid subscriber to place comments on Matthew Yglesias's blog. It is a free for all.

noga, I thought your "grinding water" neologism on another post was a keeper, along with your "carpet poster" last week. You are on a roll.

Well, we are making progress, the antisemitic mackenzie is back while loony tunes is missing, so far.

" Martin Peretz must find it galling that Matthew Yglesias gets more comments on one post on his blog than The New Republic can manage in an entire day."

I doubt Marty finds it galling. I don't think it matters one bit given that every antisemite in the world posts on that blog.

The same with Philip Weiss, Patrick Buchanan's friends.

Anti Israel posters tend to be obsessives like mackenzie and george walton.

"You are on a roll."

http://biscottisandkangaroos.files.wordpress.com/2009/03/dancer-taking-a...

"In at least one segment of their operation, their university branch, they owned up. Their pretenses are gone. They were not pro-Israel at all, and they were dropping "pro-Israel" from their nomenclature entirely. In fact, it is now dropped and they are frantically trying to explain themselves to their fans."

This isn't surprising since the loony left in academia like the old pro Soviet left has always been antisemitic while pretending not to be. Pro Soviet "Jewish" academics then as now denied Soviet and Arab antisemitism.

Sorry, I'm not "pro-Palestinian".

What I am, instead, is opposed to those who seek to reduce the Jews and the Palestinians down to their own self-serving, arrogant starting blocks.

Marty doesn't give a shit about either Jews or Palestinians. Not unless the manner in which you discuss them is in precise accord with his own blustering prejudicies.

The weakest of minds cling to every word they spit on you until you are reduced to spitting back.

And, sure, I can do that. But at least I am aware of how the emotional and psychological dynamic works here.

And you?

What kind of spitter are you?

george

basman gave me some excellent advice last week:

"... Just ignore him, totally and not only totally but completely, and not only completely but also 100% of the time, give him not even the time of day...

Attention is their nourishment; perhaps a total lack of attention will cause them to seek nourishment elsewhere.

mp:

J Street is having an identity crisis right in front of the cameras.

gw:

Only folks who treat their identity as a concrete block don't have identity crises.

That J-Street [or any other person and organization] might be confronted with ambiguity or ambivalence ["splits" in thinking] in grappling with the world around them is a sign of intellectual maturity of course. Some even recognize that "reality" can't be reduced down to a select sequence of words said to describe and encompass it.

The intellectual blockheads, however, never have this problem. Since everything is precisely where it should be in the best of all possible worlds, there is never, ever a need to doubt anything about their own point of view. And if perchance the extraordinary does happen and they change it a tad they merely rationalize it by insisting they have moved ever closer to THE The Whole Truth.

Circular psychologisms, in other words. The tautological, er, mind.

Ah, but Marty owns up to this---of sorts. Sure, a Jewish State and a Palestinian State. Nevermind that the Jewish State itself exists precisely because it was awarded to them by an international community of colonialists. And in setting it up hundreds of thousands of Palestinians had to, well, go.

Only it is not reducible down to that either, is it? No, it is not. It as actually more complicated and convoluted than the blockheads will ever admit.
And they never will, of course.

Marty's own ambivalence revolves around racism. Stick the Palestinians in their own state because and they are basically just riff-raff.

george walton
d/a

bl 462 by way of the bas man:

"... Just ignore him, totally and not only totally but completely..."
george:

Unbelievable.

Why in the world can't they simply practice what they preach: JUST IGNORE ME!
Instead, they have to whine and whine about me to others: Yes, YOU should just ignore him too.

I have friends in philosophy rooms who are flabbergasted by this cant. But these are high end philosophy venues. In the low end joints [some yahoo and google and msn philosophy "clubs"] this sort of thing goes on as well.

If that's any consolation, bl.

And you know you are reading this now.

; o )

gw

Okay, some advice:

I rarely post in TNR before 4 or 5 in the afternoon. I'm playing philosophy gigs then. I hardly ever post in The Stash now. And never in the Vine, The Treatment or the Avenue. Not because they aren't great blogs. I read them from time to time and they are. I just don't have the time.

Also, if you [or anyone] would like me to stop reading and responding to your stuff just say the word and I will. Indeed, henseforth you are on my ignore list. I put folks on it when their reaction to me is nothing but one long personal attack. Like JDs and [recently, sadly] noga.

So, congratulations.

george

"... Just ignore him, totally and not only totally but completely, and not only completely but also 100% of the time, give him not even the time of day...

I have tried, but there are times his word count surpasses the total word count of all the other posters combined. He has no idea just how tiresome he is. As of now I wait until there are at least 4 posts before I open a thread.

"But she also did not want to govern them. Who, for that matter, would? Not even the Palestinians themselves. Which is why Yasir Arafat, having a Palestinian state handed to him on a plate by Bill Clinton and Ehud Barak, broke it in front of them" I absolutely agree that Arafat was a thug and a small minded man. I do not agree that the Palestinians are incapable of governing themselves. I think those that could will never been given the chance, constrained as they are by the cultural millenarianism that is besetting the wider Arab world. But to say they can't govern themselves is just to repeat the same lie that the British used to oppress the Irish, Indians, etc. Now I want to be clear I am not equating Israel with Britain. From day one Israel has worked as hard as they could not to occupy, whereas the British believed their occupation was a divine right, what I object to is Marty using language that simply echoes imperial Britain, and helps create a false equivalency. And logically, what he says makes no sense, if he truly believes Palestinians are incapable of governing themselves, how can he possibly want Israel to co-exist with them? Now I do agree that the Palestinians, especially in Gaza, are doing a horrendous job of governing themselves, but I have faith this will not always be so. And on the West Bank, according to some news I have read, life in some cities and villages has attained some level of normalcy.

As to J street, I don't read these guys so am not in a position to judge, and even if there are multitudes more posters there, that is meaningless if most are idiots. I am sure that is where Walton learned his style of naive and contrarian gibberish.

blackton, I agree that the Palestinians are certainly capable of governing themselves, to think otherwise is to believe that they would prefer endless anarchy or endless occupation to autonomy. I can't believe that. I think the average Palestinian just wants what everyone else does, a peaceful and prosperous life with the prospect of a better future for their children. I don't think ability is the obstacle to peace, but rather the willingness to accept Israel as their neighbor. That just doesn't seem to be there...yet.

The posters on The Spine may not care about the success of Matthew Yglesias, Spencer Ackerman, Ezra Klein, Daniel Levy and Josh Marshall's Talking Points Memo - but I suspect that most of the editorial staff at The New Republic are somewhat envious of their success and the influence that goes with it.

It is precisely their success that leads to Martin Peretz's perennial malice towards them. As fight-fan Mr. Cookie points out so often, Martin Peretz is a coward who uses his exalted position at The New Republic to attack anyone who disagrees with his benighted view of the World. A real mensch would debate people like Yglesias rather than throw mud pies in their direction. Indeed, having seen the thrashing Daniel Levy gave to TNR contributor, Shmuel Rosner, in a Blogging Heads debate I hesitate to think what he could do to the intellectually indolent Martin Peretz.

""... Just ignore him, totally and not only totally but completely"

I wish we could. But as Blackton pointed out it's hard to ignore a bull in a china shop.

I suggest everyone insult everytime he posts. George likes to pretend that he doesn't care or doesn't read most people, but the truth is otherwise. He cares deeply and if everyone would just show what an ass he is and that they don't take him seriously at some point he will getr fed up and vamoose.

Sorry George, "Sorry, I'm not "pro-Palestinian"."

No, the loony is just anti-Jewish.

nazi mackenzie "The posters on The Spine may not care about the success of Matthew Yglesias, Spencer Ackerman, Ezra Klein, Daniel Levy and Josh Marshall's Talking Points Memo - but I suspect that most of the editorial staff at The New Republic are somewhat envious of their success and the influence that goes with it."

I doubt it.

Being read on a website is not exaclty a sign of success given that far fewer people read blogs than read newspapers and magazines in hard copy.

Speaking of resentment, this says it all

"Martin Peretz is a coward who uses his exalted position at The New Republic to attack anyone who disagrees with his benighted view of the World." nazi mackenzie

So Peretz is not a success, but he is exalted.

mackenzie is using Walton logic, now. No surprise there.

Will someone please tell me what "J Street" is, I missed the memo? Thx.

Wiki has a good enough coverage

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/J_Street

But it being wiki it needs to be read with 10g of salt.

"The posters on The Spine may not care about the success of ..."

How successful would these bloggers be if the multitudes of posters who drop comments on their sites had to pay for the right to do so? How many of them would put their money where their mouth is?

After all, N & D Mackenzie presumably pay for the right to comment on Peretz's blog. I would attribute their readiness to part with the necessary funds in order to be able to comment here as an objective measure of Peretz's success.

Richard Landis asks an important question:

October 27, 2009

"And Where is the A-Street?: What’s wrong with the Arab “Peace” Camp
Filed under: Arab-Israeli Conflict, Demopaths and Dupes, HSJP, JStreet, Self-Criticism — Richard Landes @ 5:01 am — Print This Post

Rebecca Abou-Chedid, former director of outreach at the New America Foundation’s Middle East Task Force and former national political director at the Arab American Institute, writes about why she should be able to proudly give to JStreet and JStreet should not be ashamed to take her donations.

It’s a no-brainer why an Arab prominent in the American-Arab community wants to support a group that wants to pressure Israel into unilateral concessions for the sake of “peace,” and it’s not surprising that she would dismiss the opposition’s substantive objectives — forced concessions that are not reciprocated will bring hostility and war — as so much pique at not controlling the agenda (another ad hominem).

What’s not understandable (unless you accept the honor-shame paradigm), is why Arabs and Muslims haven’t formed an A-Street, militating for Arab/Muslim/Palestinian concessions aimed at making peace more likely?...."

http://www.theaugeanstables.com/2009/10/27/and-where-is-the-a-street-wha...

Ben Cohen from Z-word blog sums it up nicely:

"What I have had is an education, of sorts, into J-Street itself. What the conference has been lacking in terms of genuine insight has been more than compensated for by gossip opportunities: the unctuous Max Blumenthal orchestrating a cheap laugh at Elie Wiesel’s expense; the decision of J-Street’s student arm to drop the “pro-Israel” bit of the mother organization’s “pro-Israel, pro-peace” tagline; the booing of liberal Rabbi Eric Yoffie of the Union of Reform Judaism; the presence of toxic, Israel-hating obsessives like Philip Weiss and Richard Silverstein under the veneer of an openness which was not, it seems, that open; the bizarre spiritual meanderings of M.J. Rosenberg…I could go on.

Above all else, the abiding impression I have of J-Street is its unapologetic parochialism. For J-Street, the Middle East begins and ends with the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. You will search the conference program in vain for any discussion of the Kurdish issue or the future of Iraq. Concerned about the persistence of authoritarianism in the Arab world? Find another conference. Curious to learn more about the politics of oil? Best not to stop here."

http://blog.z-word.com/2009/10/j-streets-parochialism/#more-1440

I recommend taking a look at the comments. Some of them discuss a subject we had here recently, concerning the Obama administration's budget cuts in funding groups that monitor human rights abuses in Iran.

First, I do think that J Street, which is a pretty new organization, has to deal with its goal to be pro-Israel and pro-peace. I do think that there is a portion of the group who, if you pull away the curtain, is anti-Israel. However, those voices appear to me to be on the margins of the group. Still, the group is in its infancy and it will have to work all this out.

As for peretz' posts about J Street, what they reveal to me is that one, J Street is being successful in at least challenging the conventional perspective on how American Jews can and should support Israel and the peace process. And two, how neanderthals like peretz - whose entire perspective on most issues, especially on the Middle East is Say it Loudest, Say it with the most Bellicosity, and never never ever rethink a Bad Idea - will never understand anything other than his own calcified view point. With his ridiculous "circle jerk" dismissal of writers like Matt Y., Spencer A., and Ezra Klein, three guys who on their worst day, are better, more coherent, and more thoughtful writers than peretz and his ilks can ever pray to be, peretz shows himself to be what he has been for some time: a bitter, resentful, irrelevant crank.

This is so bloody convoluted, it's no wonder chaos reigns. An outstanding - no, epitomal is more like it - example of why conservatives label liberals/progressives "fuzzy-minded." Oy!

You made some good points, Cookie. Did you see Jon Chait's post on the subject?

I posted some of this there:

This group reminds me of the way left wing Jews jumped in to take over the Yiddish Bund ( a Jewish labor group that worked to preserve Jewish culture in Czarist Russia) under orders from Lenin. These folk posed as “Jewish” leftists wanting to preserve Yiddishkeit, but they were nothing of the kind. They were just leftists who wanted to subvert the organization.

During the Stalin era the Bund, as is well known was, by turns suppressed then used by Stalin during WW2 for propaganda purposes and finally many of their leaders were shot or sent to Siberia.

There is also a comparison to be made to the way Communists in the US wanted to take over and subvert the Union movement. (Lenin never believed in workers union that tried to bargain for better work conditions and pay---he believed in Union that would work towards his own revolutionary goals).

If J Street is to succeed they will have to challenge the anti-Israel uber leftists within it they way the Unions in the US after WW2 challenged and threw out the Stalinists in their midst.

"This is so bloody convoluted, it's no wonder chaos reigns. An outstanding - no, epitomal is more like it - example of why conservatives label liberals/progressives "fuzzy-minded." Oy!"

Yes, T.

There is method and purposefulness in "fuzzy mindedness" as well as in madness, T. The aim is to subvert.

I see the Taliban had another great "victory" in Peshawar, killing many innocent Pakistanis, mostly women. Targeting your own people, your own potential supporters, yeah, that has the recipe of success. We just have to always remember this is the nature of our enemy. Women hating, goat fucking madmen. The west really does have to find a way to promote reformist, modernizing Muslims or I can guarantee you in a generation the whole of Pakistan and most of Afghanistan will be buried under a ton of radioactive rubble.

Yeah, jackson. I do try to give the benefit of the doubt (probably to a fault), and I tend to forget how mad it makes me when I finally admit that it's been in vain again - and again and again.

Tgossard, you know, I feel the same way, and it is partly why I go into snark angry overdrive when it happens.