On Thu, 11 Apr 2002, Baardwijk, J. van DTO/SLWPD/RZO/BOZO wrote: > Thank you so much for this "constructive" remark. And then Americans still > wonder why Europeans seem to become anti-American.... :-( > > When you re-read my post, you will notice that I did not say anything about > this being right or wrong. Rather, I was suggesting that their might be an > other explanation than the usual American interpretation that this is > anti-Semitism and/or racism.
And I'm saying that IMO the explanation you gave is prototypically racist, based on America's experience with organizations like the KKK. If you'll re-read my post, I also allowed that it's probably just a couple of twits at fault, and not a whole class of people (like the legislature of Norway, or Norway proper, or Europe). Think carefully about the reasoning. In order for your explanation to to make sense, then someone has to reason thusly: a) enemies of Jews kill innocent Europeans sufficiently often that it's not safe to have Jewish symbols, that is, expressions of support for Israel, displayed in the Parliament. b) allies of Jews don't kill innocent Europeans often enough to be a threat, so it's safe to let people walk around with pro-Palestinian symbols in the Parliament. c) the best way to be safe, then, is to suppress the display of Jewish symbols while permitting the display of symbols *that support the allies of the people who kill Jews and innocent Europeans in the process.* This is to concede nothing less than that murder of Jews has more sanction than the rights of Jews. Nothing less. Now, maybe I'm misunderstanding you. Maybe you think they were only acting to protect the individual, or that this might represent a reflexive security response that somehow doesn't reflect a deep-seated anti-Jewish bias...but I honestly don't understand how such a response could be both reflexive and unbiased at the same time. If you want me to understand, then I need for you to explain your reasoning. In America, there was a time when black people would go to the white police to ask for help dealing with the white KKK, and the police would tell the black people to go away because being seen with them might put the police in danger, i.e. the KKK might see the police as pro-black and as a target. That is why I believe that when a civil authority puts its own safety above the dignity and rights of a minority, then it is racism. That is why I interpret the event in Norway's Parliament as I do, and that is why I react as I do to your explanation. Marvin Long Austin, Texas
