******************** POSTING RULES & NOTES ******************** #1 YOU MUST clip all extraneous text when replying to a message. #2 This mail-list, like most, is publicly & permanently archived. #3 Subscribe and post under an alias if #2 is a concern. *****************************************************************
I have managed to make my way to a computer and decided to just ignore Jeff. The two issues I mentioned that I take with some of Greenstein's writings (but not this one in particular) -- witch-hunts for anti-Semitism and ethnocentrism -- are as follows. Greenstein was one of a number of liberal and pseudo-left bloggers who showed up on Stanford SJP's page attempting to rationalize the cancellation of the Palestinian refugee event, ostensibly because Alison Weir had shown up to support the event, but actually because of an argument about whether or not it was appropriate (given the repressive campus climate) for the refugees to challenge Israel's "right to exist". We have already discussed this incident in depth and I would refer comrades to this particular post in which I compiled all of the relevant links: https://www.mail-archive.com/marxism%40lists.csbs.utah.edu/msg16512.html Since that time, Greenstein appears to have deleted a number of his own posts on the Facebook page, including those in which another commentator challenged him by calling attention to (groundless) accusations of anti-Semitism against Greenstein from Zionists in the UK, as well as Greenstein's support for Corbyn against such allegations. This is an important point: Corbyn was being slandered as an anti-Semite for having visited a small, pro-Palestinian community org in the UK ten years prior in which one of the members was an obscure Holocaust denier named Paul Eisen. After the original Alison Weir debacle (when the heads of two pro-Palestinian orgs, JVP and USCEIO, put out statements alleging Alison Weir to be unacceptably tolerating of anti-Semitism), there was a massive backlash from the rank-and-file of both of those organizations, along with a number of prominent left people (Richard Falk, Joel Kovel, Sunaina Maira, Cindy Sheehan, David Rovics, and others): stopdivisiveattacks.wordpress.com . Almost immediately after this petition was started, Greenstein issued statements condemning the condemnation of Weir, and managed to comb through the list of hundreds of names and cherry-picked out the same Paul Eisen <http://azvsas.blogspot.com/2015/07/jvp-dissociates-itself-from-alison-weir.html> (who is not one of the prominent "VIPs" listed at the top of the petition, but one of the hundreds of names from common activists). What's more, he later eulogized one of Alison Weir's most ardent supporters, Hedy Epstein. Epstein, a Holocaust survivor and a civil rights activist, had worked with Alison Weir extensively, traveled to Palestine with Weir, and organized an event featuring Weir as the speaker <http://www.ifamericansknew.org/media/hedyepstein.html> *after the accusations* from JVP and USCEIO. Epstein is also one of the "VIPs" listed in the petition in defense of Weir. And yet Hedy is praised by Greenstein <http://azvsas.blogspot.com/2016/05/hedy-epstein-woman-who-was-saint-in-her.html> as someone who knew that racism is bad, etc. As I mentioned prior, Greenstein has also had the audacity to compare <http://azvsas.blogspot.com/2011/12/richard-falk-expends-on-his.html> Richard Falk, the former UN Special Rapporteur to Palestine to Nazi philosopher Martin Heidegger. He makes the same accusation against Falk that were made against Weir, namely being an apologist for anti-Semitism. Greenstein's worst comments of course, were saved for Counter-Punch. Again, we have already discussed on this list the absurd "statistics" <https://louisproyect.org/2015/07/24/in-defense-of-counterpunch/> that Greenstein compiled to allege that Counter-Punch is part of some sort of Nazi infiltration politics. He similarly smears Louis as an ex-Marxist (apparently for hosting the piece I wrote about the accusations against Weir). That is not to say that Counter-Punch has not, in fact, fucked up occasionally (such as by publishing Diana Johnstone's awful commentary about immigration or by granting space to a small number of unknowns to promote conspiracy theories). But it is quite another to reduce the entire publication to a Nazi rag and call on leftists to boycott it, let alone citing statistics produced by a crank. In short, Greenstein's accusations of anti-Semitism are all over the place. He defends Corbyn from an associational attack based on having visted Paul Eisen, and then smears the pro-Weir petition for the same reason. He condemns Weir as an anti-Semite while praising one of her most ardent supporters as a committed anti-racist. He defends that supporter, who helped organize events for Weir, while attempting to rationalize shutting down a Palestinian refugee's event ostensibly because of Weir's support for/presence at the event. He then deletes those rationalizations. He calls for boycotting a flagship left publication using completely absurd statistics and by referencing their refusal to agree with his accusations against one of their occasional contributors, namely Atzmon. These accusations are internally contradictory. The fact that they are being alleged against leftists and pro-Palestine commentators, often based on multiple degrees of separation, leads me to conclude that this kind of commentary is basically a witch-hunt. It is not limited to anti-Semitic commentary, but extends to those who disagree with such accusations, events in which those who disagree with the accusations are present, publications that publish non-racist and non-rightist commentary by those alleged to be so, and so forth. It's not surprising that his thoughts are all over the place, given the framework from which he approaches Palestine solidarity activism, namely the ethnocentric one I mentioned. If we were to start our advocacy for Palestine from the premise that Palestinians are people and that all of them, including those who are out of sight and mind -- such as the refugees -- are agents of their own struggle, it would not make sense to engage in this kind of witch-hunt. Like attempts to comb through black resistance movements to find "anti-whiteism," -- something that is certainly present on occasion <https://www.splcenter.org/fighting-hate/extremist-files/group/nation-islam> and from which one can thereby begin to smear the entirety of black resistance -- it is a form of politics premised entirely around the fate and inclusion of the dominant community, wherein the interests of the subjugated community are secondary. Anna Baltzer <http://mondoweiss.net/2012/10/the-privileging-of-jewish-american-voices-on-the-issue-is-rooted-in-racism> and Nada Elia <http://mondoweiss.net/2016/04/it-is-time-to-stop-celebrating-jewish-dissent-in-the-palestine-solidarity-movement/> have both written on the privileging of Jewish voices. Ironically, so has JVP's executive director <http://interviews.jadaliyya.com/pages/index/21194/what-is-the-role-of-academia-in-political-change_t>, who explicitly invokes this privilege <http://mondoweiss.net/2016/06/washington-publishes-boycott/>. Much of Greenstein's writings are centered around the Jewish community's relationship to Zionism and anti-Semitism. His website's URL is "azvsas" -- that is, *a*nti-*Z*ionism *vs*. *a*nti-*S*emitism. He is completely correct to point out that Zionism is an ideology rooted in anti-Semitic narratives. It is quite another thing to use this as the starting point for pro-Palestinian advocacy today. The fact of historical Jewish opposition to Zionism (and vice versa) does not change the fact that Zionism today is a white supremacist project, wherein Jews -- including Jews outside of Palestine -- are posited as the racially dominant community. Premising pro-Palestinian advocacy around the fate, inclusion, history, and agency of this community is by definition ethnocentric. I cannot locate the exact blog post but a few years ago, I remember Greenstein writing about how his feelings about solidarity with Palestine were outgrowths of his anguish about the Holocaust, wherein defending the human dignity of Palestinians was a logical corollary to recognizing the inhumanity of the Holocaust toward Jews. I don't want to misquote it as I do not have it in front of me, but this is the sort of "ethnocentrism" I am speaking of. The human dignity of Palestinians is guaranteed irrespective of the situation of Jews in the West. One should not need to see Palestinian human rights as an outgrowth of rejecting the hatred of other groups (even if that is how one encountered the subject), just as one need not see the defense of black rights as an outgrowth of recognizing the humanity of white people. But this is the premise of this kind of politics, which attempts to jujitsu accusations of anti-Semitism from Zionists by emphasizing that Zionists are the ones who actually have a history of intolerance against the Jews. Given that this is the starting point of the narrative he has crafted, how can anyone be surprised that his accusations of anti-Semitism are all over the place? Of course when you are blasting a shotgun you will occasionally hit people who actually use irresponsible rhetoric and delve into anti-Jewish narratives, like Gilad Atzmon. But these accusations have extended well past that. At the same time, he has been ardent in defending liberal Jewish groups that take decidedly weaker stances on Zionism, such as JVP. It is unsurprising then that a conversation that premises the Palestinian narrative entirely around the experiences of Jews would engender an environment in which accusations of anti-Semitism are bandied about carelessly not only by Greenstein but also against him by Zionists. The story is explicitly framed as one of the Jewish community and their experiences and relationship to the Zionist project, even when in opposition. - Amith _________________________________________________________ Full posting guidelines at: http://www.marxmail.org/sub.htm Set your options at: http://lists.csbs.utah.edu/options/marxism/archive%40mail-archive.com
