Welcome to DU!
The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards.
Join the community:
Create a free account
Support DU (and get rid of ads!):
Become a Star Member
Latest Breaking News
Editorials & Other Articles
General Discussion
The DU Lounge
All Forums
Issue Forums
Culture Forums
Alliance Forums
Region Forums
Support Forums
Help & Search
General Discussion
In reply to the discussion: In Private Fundraiser, Keith Ellison Said Israel Controls US Policy [View all]shira
(30,109 posts)157. It's come to mean that, with literally no exceptions.
Obama said it best:
OBAMA: DENYING ISRAELS RIGHT TO EXIST AS A JEWISH HOMELAND IS ANTI-SEMITIC
But having defined what sort of critiques of Israel dont constitute anti-Semitism, the president then proceeded to outline those that do. And this is where he broke new ground. Asked by Goldberg to delineate the relationship between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism, Obama answered as follows:
Essentially, Obama defined anti-Zionismas distinct from sharp, public criticism of Israel and its policiesas anti-Semitism. In his construction, denying Israels right to exist (i.e. Zionism) is to deny the lessons of history and betray a deeply flawed moral outlook. In making this case, Obama joins other world leaders like British Prime Minister David Cameron and French Prime Minister Manuel Vallsboth, like him, critics of Israeli settlements and advocates for a two-state solutionwho have pointedly labeled anti-Zionism as anti-Semitism. Likewise, Obamas words accord with the U.S. State Departments official definition of anti-Semitism, which includes denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, and denying Israel the right to exist.
Obamas articulation of this position, however, is far more eloquent and rich than any of these antecedents. His explanation for why opposing Israels existence is bigoted is simultaneously moral, historical and structural. To consign the Jews to statelessness, in Obamas view, would undo the painful progress made by the world towards treating them as equals and protecting them from prejudice. It would turn back the clock to a much darker time, when Jews had no national home to stand up for their rights and offer them refuge. It would be an abdication of moral responsibility for the persecutions of the past and a willful ignorance as to their implications.
But having defined what sort of critiques of Israel dont constitute anti-Semitism, the president then proceeded to outline those that do. And this is where he broke new ground. Asked by Goldberg to delineate the relationship between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism, Obama answered as follows:
I think a good baseline is: Do you think that Israel has a right to exist as a homeland for the Jewish people, and are you aware of the particular circumstances of Jewish history that might prompt that need and desire? And if your answer is no, if your notion is somehow that that history doesnt matter, then thats a problem, in my mind. If, on the other hand, you acknowledge the justness of the Jewish homeland, you acknowledge the active presence of anti-Semitismthat its not just something in the past, but it is currentif you acknowledge that there are people and nations that, if convenient, would do the Jewish people harm because of a warped ideology. If you acknowledge those things, then you should be able to align yourself with Israel where its security is at stake, you should be able to align yourself with Israel when it comes to making sure that it is not held to a double standard in international fora, you should align yourself with Israel when it comes to making sure that it is not isolated.
Essentially, Obama defined anti-Zionismas distinct from sharp, public criticism of Israel and its policiesas anti-Semitism. In his construction, denying Israels right to exist (i.e. Zionism) is to deny the lessons of history and betray a deeply flawed moral outlook. In making this case, Obama joins other world leaders like British Prime Minister David Cameron and French Prime Minister Manuel Vallsboth, like him, critics of Israeli settlements and advocates for a two-state solutionwho have pointedly labeled anti-Zionism as anti-Semitism. Likewise, Obamas words accord with the U.S. State Departments official definition of anti-Semitism, which includes denying the Jewish people their right to self-determination, and denying Israel the right to exist.
Obamas articulation of this position, however, is far more eloquent and rich than any of these antecedents. His explanation for why opposing Israels existence is bigoted is simultaneously moral, historical and structural. To consign the Jews to statelessness, in Obamas view, would undo the painful progress made by the world towards treating them as equals and protecting them from prejudice. It would turn back the clock to a much darker time, when Jews had no national home to stand up for their rights and offer them refuge. It would be an abdication of moral responsibility for the persecutions of the past and a willful ignorance as to their implications.
http://www.tabletmag.com/scroll/191196/obama-denying-israels-right-to-exist-as-a-jewish-homeland-is-anti-semitic
Being against any indigenous movement, as Zionism clearly is, would be considered racist in any other context.
Edit history
Please sign in to view edit histories.
Recommendations
0 members have recommended this reply (displayed in chronological order):
164 replies
= new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight:
NoneDon't highlight anything
5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
RecommendedHighlight replies with 5 or more recommendations
In Private Fundraiser, Keith Ellison Said Israel Controls US Policy [View all]
ericson00
Nov 2016
OP
It's not antisemitism to recognize that Israel has a major influence on our foreign policy. nt
killbotfactory
Dec 2016
#144
Depending on context it might be. And there is a lot of other context in that post. nt
stevenleser
Dec 2016
#146
So the masters of identity politics decided that hating Palestinians is the right thing to do
jfern
Nov 2016
#6
The "strong majority" of Americans don't think much about Israel one way or anther..
whathehell
Nov 2016
#78
"If you want to ignore a poll that gives 'preety much' gives the same result every year...
whathehell
Nov 2016
#118
the reason I won't report your post is so that the left-wing anti-Semitism can be exposed
ericson00
Dec 2016
#126
Yep, I've never seen a USS Liberty reference that wasn't a smokescreen for antisemitism. nt
stevenleser
Dec 2016
#143
In 2016, Donald Trump was the master of 'Identity Politics'. He ran on hating minorities.
emulatorloo
Nov 2016
#43
What does it matter Trumpy is going to end it anyway...so how a DNC chairman feels
Demsrule86
Nov 2016
#80
I know exactly why Trump won...and the fight needed to happen before he won.
Demsrule86
Dec 2016
#133
MEK was delisted by the US and everyone else because they found out the info implicating them
stevenleser
Dec 2016
#123
Odd you see merely two possibilities. Simplistic thinking is rather convenient to one's bias, yes?
LanternWaste
Nov 2016
#87
Let's get Dean to lobby for the Democrats as DNC chair, as he's damn good at that
emulatorloo
Nov 2016
#49
I have nothing against Ellison, I admire him greatly, but Howard Dean is what we need right now.
phleshdef
Nov 2016
#11
And pointing out that the messenger is an anti-Muslim bigot is a statement of fact.
baldguy
Nov 2016
#28
So, progressive Dems who find Israels undue influence problematic are "anti Israel" now?
baldguy
Dec 2016
#130
The US is trying to develop relationships with moderate Iran? You think Iran is moderate? n/t
shira
Dec 2016
#160
Obviously Israel doesn't have great influence as Israel lost the battle on the Iran deal. n/t
shira
Nov 2016
#113
Those quotes are not from Ellison. Random quotes from other people are not at issue. nt
stevenleser
Dec 2016
#145
Doesn't matter. The question is whether Ellison is suitable based on his statements.
stevenleser
Dec 2016
#149
given Jewish voters' generosity to the Democratic Party, in votes, activism, and yes, contributions,
ericson00
Nov 2016
#40
Ellison is 100 percent correct. However it's not something you say out loud.
hollowdweller
Nov 2016
#75
Should Ellison be required to register his status as Muslim? Seeing that he's untrustworthy
tenderfoot
Nov 2016
#84
LoL. It wasn't a direct quote, but Ellison was clearly talking about Israel. n/t
shira
Nov 2016
#107
My former Congressman said the same. He said that AIPAC wields a lot of influence
mahina
Dec 2016
#127
"When the Americans who trace their roots back to those 350 million get involved everything changes"
Fast Walker 52
Dec 2016
#156