Re: Ethnic nationalism

["David B. Shemano" <dshemano@xxxxxxxxxx>]

In response to Jim Devine:

You really seem insulted simply because I read your post to make an Israel-Germany comparison.  You also seem to think my interpretation was not simply wrong, but irrational.  You appear to reach that conclusion because you believe a reader should never make any assumptions about the author's intention, even though the assumption may be statistically sensible.  We are going to have to agree to disagree.

David Shemano


--- Original Message---
 To: PEN-L@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
 From: Jim Devine <jdevine03@xxxxxxxxx>
 Sent:  9/12/2007  3:43PM
 Subject: Re: [PEN-L] Ethnic nationalism

>> me:  >>As far as I can tell, [David Shemano] interpret[s] people as
>> being crybabies if they either
>>
>> >>1) disagree with your opinions (or, alternatively, with only your
>> opinions on Israel), or
>>
>> >> 2) follow deviation from from the official Party Line on Israel by
>> actually daring to defend themselves against the shit-storm of
>> criticism that such deviance evokes -- rather than surrendering to the
>> Alan Dershowitzes of the world.<<
>>
>> David Shemano wrote:
>> > Absolutely not.  The crybabies are people like Carter and Mearsheimer and Walt
>> who complain how you can't criticize Israel in the United States, but are really
>> complaining that you can't criticize Israel in the US without receiving criticism back. I
>> am making a very specific point, so don't misinterpet it.  <
>>
>> Any politician (Carter) or full-time academic (M&W) has to be ready
>> for "criticism." I think those people were -- but received much more,
>> i.e., mass boycotts, efforts to keep them off the air and off the
>> page, etc. Of course, facts are always subject to interpretation. But
>> I don't think these people received mere "criticism."
>>
>> DS: > I will give you one example.  Here is the NY Times article on
>> the controversy of Mearsheimer and Walt's book tour: ...  If you read
>> the article, what was the controversy?  Some Jewish organizations
>> refused to invite the authors to pitch the books or worse, insisted
>> that the presentations be balanced by an opposing view.
>> Crybabies....<
>>
>> My understanding was that there was much more that. Given the response
>> to Finkelstein, Chomsky, Kovel, and others over the years, I believe I
>> am accurate in my representation of what Carter and M&W received as a
>> "shit-storm."  (Look, for example, at the shit that Finkelstein
>> received from Dershowitz, partly with the University of California's
>> help.)
>>
>> Even I have been on the receiving end of this storm: some otherwise
>> rational people have assumed that my criticism of Israel involves
>> equating Israel with Nazi Germany.
>>
>> me: >>How do you know what's reasonable for me to assume? You may
>> share the so-called "libertarian" opinions on Thalidomide sketched
>> above, but it is wrong for me to assume that you do.<<
>>
>> > No, it would not be wrong to do so.  [which means "it would be right to do so"?] If I
>> were to accept the libertarian label, it would be reasonable for you to make judgments
>> and assumptions.  You are a Lefty.  Is it unreasonable for me to assume that you think
>> Fidel Casto is more admirable than George Bush? <
>>
>> My point is that _any_ mental category has exceptions. Any political
>> category involves variety.
>>
>> For example, some lefties, such as those in the International
>> Socialist Organization, hate Castro. They equate people like Castro to
>> those like Bush, seeing _both_ of them as leading capitalist
>> countries. Even though I reject this view, the ISO folks are still
>> "lefties" (as far as I'm concerned) because they are highly critical
>> of capitalism, support labor's struggles against capitalism, etc.
>>
>> Of course, the issue of "where do you draw the line?" comes up. (Other
>> lefties, who shall remain nameless, might say that the ISO does not
>> consist of lefties.) In the real world, where reality is much messier
>> than in our theories, we always face such questions.
>>
>> DS:> That health-care should be guaranteed by the government and/or
>> provided through a single-payer system?  Give me enough time, I could
>> make dozens of predictions about your views and be right on just about
>> every one.  And you could probably do the same about me.  We both have
>> quirks, but on balance, we would both be pretty accurate about the
>> other.<
>>
>> Sure, but this kind of "on average"/statistical thinking is not
>> conducive to a serious conversation between intellectuals or other
>> people wanting to be at least half-intelligent.
>>
>> For example, someone might apply this kind of "on average"/statistical
>> thinking to jump to the _false_ conclusion that just because someone
>> thinks that Israel represents one of the worst kinds of ethnic
>> nationalism on earth, he thinks that Israel = Nazi Germany. After all,
>> based on "on average"/statistical study, a lot of lefties seem to make
>> this equation (in the researcher's opinion, based on his political
>> assumptions).
>>
>> Of course, that involves more than "on average"/statistical thinking
>> thinking. It also reflects the dominant cultural stereotypes in the US
>> these days. It seems that "we all know" that anti-Zionism is merely a
>> shoddy cover for anti-Semitism.  That "we all know" assumption
>> infiltrates its way into all sorts of otherwise reasonable
>> individuals' heads.
>> --
>> Jim Devine / "Segui il tuo corso, e lascia dir le genti." (Go your own
>> way and let people talk.) --  Karl, paraphrasing Dante.
>>
>>
>>