*Subject: Re: Nessel says she won't attend*

Kristin's claim deserves a better answer than Mark's because there is a real 
history behind it, and the movement is worse off pretending otherwise.

Proudhon's notebooks, Bakunin's Polémique contre les Juifs , the entire 
tradition Bebel had to name as the socialism of fools precisely because it was 
a live danger inside the German workers' movement, Stalin's anti-cosmopolitan 
campaign, the Slánský trial, and the Doctors' Plot. And in our own moment, the 
conspiracist habit of explaining US policy in the region through the lobby 
rather than through the strategic and accumulation interests of American 
capital, which is a substitution of a cabal for a class analysis and slides 
toward the older thing, whether or not anyone intends it. That deformation is 
real. It should be fought where it appears, and it appears.

What the history cannot do is the work Kristin wants from it. "The Democrats 
are being taken over by antisemites" is not an analysis. It is a moral 
characterization offered in place of one. The thing actually requiring 
explanation is a coalition fracture: a party whose voting base, especially 
under forty, has moved decisively on Gaza while its officeholders, its donor 
layer, and its foreign policy staff have not. That gap does not need bigotry to 
produce it. It needs only a party form in which the base has no mechanism to 
bind the people who speak in its name. Nessel is on one side of that gap and 
has the standing to feel the pressure of it. Reaching for antisemitism to 
explain what she is feeling is what people reach for when the structural 
explanation is unflattering to them.

Mark, I think your answer concedes too much ground too fast. "I have not 
noticed it in 56 years" invites exactly the reply Kristin gave you. The correct 
answer is not that antisemitism does not exist on the left. It is that its 
existence does not license the inference she is drawing and that the inference 
is doing political work independent of its truth. The conflation converts a 
dispute about a state's conduct into a dispute about the moral character of its 
critics, which means the state's conduct never has to be argued. Draper said 
the same thing about how anti-Sovietism functioned in the other direction, and 
the mechanism is identical.

Michael is right on the substance and right that the largest concentration of 
actual antisemitism in American politics sits with a Christian nationalist 
current that is also the most reliable bloc of support for the Israeli state. 
That is not a paradox. It is what it looks like when a state is valued 
instrumentally by people who do not much care what happens to the population it 
claims to represent.

Now, John. I have to say this plainly. Your post is worse than useless here.

"Anti-Semitism has often been a recurring racism shown against Arab peoples" is 
a philological dodge. The word has a settled referent, fixed since Marr coined 
it in 1879 to mean exactly one thing, and redefining it does not broaden our 
solidarity; it just hands Kristin the argument that we cannot name the 
phenomenon because we do not want to look at it.

The rest is wrong in the details, which matters, because everyone on this list 
who wants to dismiss the anti-Zionist position will quote the errors and skip 
the argument. The Palestinian general strike of 1936 ran roughly six months, 
April to October, not six years. The revolt that followed ran to 1939. The 
Betar naval school operated at Civitavecchia under the Fascist regime from 
1934, which is a real and damning fact and is not the same as Mussolini 
providing boats to attack British installations. The approach to the Axis 
powers was Lehi in 1940 and 1941, not the Irgun generally. IBM's Dehomag 
subsidiary and GM's Opel plants were corporations, not "this very U.S. 
government," and collapsing the two destroys the point you are trying to make 
about American complicity, which is better made through the St. Louis, the 
Wagner-Rogers bill, and the 1944 refusal to bomb the rail lines to Birkenau. 
Those are documented, and they are enough.

The position is not complicated and does not require any of that. We oppose the 
Israeli state's conduct, and we oppose a state form that constitutionally 
subordinates a fifth of its citizens, on democratic grounds, the same grounds 
on which we oppose every confessional and ethnically defined state. We oppose 
antisemitism wherever it turns up, including in our own ranks, and we do not 
treat it as a lesser matter to be managed. Neither commitment is a concession 
extracted by the other. They are the same commitment, and the whole force of 
the conflation is to make us believe we have to choose.

Tony

--
Tony


-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-
Groups.io Links: You receive all messages sent to this group.
View/Reply Online (#42891): https://groups.io/g/marxmail/message/42891
Mute This Topic: https://groups.io/mt/120683659/21656
-=-=-
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.
#4 Do not exceed five posts a day.
-=-=-
Group Owner: [email protected]
Unsubscribe: https://groups.io/g/marxmail/leave/13617172/21656/1316126222/xyzzy 
[[email protected]]
-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-=-


Reply via email to