Auntie Semitism

Well, there I go, cracking wise about a serious subject. Which automatically makes me...an anti-Semite! Geez, I'm glad that's off my chest. What a great weight lifted! Monkey off my back! ([s] close sarcasm tag [/s])

A commenter came by to warn me of linking to a writer who regularly posts remarks critical of Israel's actions:

Anonymous said...

By endorsing and linking to Fleming Lee's site, you are endorsing his views that the holocaust did not occur. He is extremely anti-Semitic in his public postings on the very blog that you are linking to... Be aware of who you call friends, as you will be judged by their deeds.

At the time, it was tempting to say, "Gosh, Anonymous, that's very sage advice. Could I get that in a suppository?" Instead, it made me think about what I really thought. About what's true about that big subject, and what's not. In the absence of knowing exactly what he/she/it might be referring to about Fleming Lee, I replied as follows:

Thank you for your observation and admonitions. While I have not read all of Fleming's blog, I have become aware of his view that Israel is now a colossal pain in everyone's ass. I fully endorse that one.

As for holocausts, I would guess Fleming believes that no one group can claim it as their "brand." I've been close enough to ethnic cleansing to know, as did Hannah Arendt, that holocaust is very much in the eye of the beholder.

Millions of Jewish people were victims of virulent nationalism. Hundreds of Jewish people made up over 90% of the founding Soviet Comintern, which went to kill a score and more million Jews. Does stating these facts make me a "holocaust denier?" Does noting that the Neo-conservative movement has a de facto Comintern dominated with names like Feith, Abrams, Wolfowitz, Podhoretz, Kristol, Goldberg, Strauss (in absentia), Perle, Kissinger, Frum, et al make the Jewish people perpetrators of a latter-day Holocaust?

I endorse none of these things nor the vicious, state-sponsored murders of innocents they so euphemistically promote. I decry them, and have every reason to believe Fleming does, too. Food for thought. What, Anonymous, do your eyes behold?

Regarding the use of the term "anti-Semitism:" in the future interests of precision, its full meaning may be helpful. All Arabs, including the Israelites, are Semites. Ishmael and Isaac have the same father. I am not an anti-Semite, and don't believe in killing Arabs.

Later, I went to Lee Fleming's site, poked around, and found whole gales of fresh air which cleared away much intellectual fog on the topic, including some of mine. But first off, for the record, I'll go with something simpler. Guess what? I like Semites. And I really, really like Jews. I liked one of them so much I married her. That's why I hate the Zionistas. Why so much? Umm, lemme see...because they're bullies.

Lots of bullies had parents who beat them. And that's terrible, because the abused so often turn into abusers. But rather than re-enact abuse and exact pointless revenge on other innocents, how about dealing with it? Because until you do, you're still bullies, bullies who claim to dish out beatings on behalf of everyone who happens to share some DNA with you. I ask you, knowing the likely response in advance: was there ever an uglier thing to be, than this? I ask you again, then how are you any better? Everyone hates you just as much.

"The Holocaust did not occur" is a phrase applied increasingly by propagandists and apologists to people who believe Jews weren't the only victims of unspeakable crimes in WWII. Let's look at that for a minute. Holocaust denial. What does it mean? Maybe this: why should the Jews get a majority share of the milk of human kindness? They got a country, at least, and have quite a PR campaign going. But what about the Armenian Kurds? What about the Japanese nuclear bomb victims who bear different kinds of tattoos? What about the piles of dead Slavs, the ethnic-German Ukranians, the Serbs, the Croats, the Slovenians, the Vietnamese, Africa in general, the history of pretty much all of South America, and the 100 million slaughtered by Mao? Must I use the term "Killing FieldsTM" to describe all this tragedy, or can I say "Holocaust" if I pay the Simon Wiesenthal center its regular royalty? Could you somehow allow me to donate my Holocaust Royalty Check to Iraqi children orphaned by my government's "smart" bombs, without being accused of anti-Semitism, and probably terrorism?

Expansionist Zionism, if it ever had any usefulness, is now a bankrupt, xenophobic, criminal, zany mess which literally threatens the lives of billions of people. So, ah-yup, count me against further Zionism. Enough with the Zionism, already. I'm against unspeakable crimes, against the violent, infinitely manifold means of torture and death visited upon people because of a bunch of nonsense. I'm against World War Four, annoying traffic jams, people who try to deceive and poison me and my family with crap so they can get richer, I've never much liked broccoli sprouts and think them an abomination, and I don't want the world to end in a nuclear war started over religious philosophies which are, to put it mildly, tenuous at times. Is this so wrong?

So if I must be called a Holocaust-Denier, here goes: Jews don't have a monopoly on victim-hood, nor does a Jewish nation deserve free passes to viciously apply violence because collectively it's more than a little verkakt in the head. My views on this subject are thoroughly unexceptional. Got a little news for ya: There are a lot of Holocaust-Deniers out here. The American people, the world, and especially the Middle Eastern world, are sick and tired of the xenophobia, exceptionalism, racism, self-justifying ratiocinations, obvious lies and outright murders. Do you think I want my tax dollars supporting this evil bullshit? Think again. Cut it out, or to paraphrase Woody Allen, there are only two roads in front of Israel; down one lies ignominious ruin. Down the other lies utter catastrophe.

I went and read many of the posts the Anonymous Commenter presumably took exception to. Here are some discussing the growing movement of Jews against Israel. Jews who are being called Anti-Semites. How weird is that? Maybe the Anti-Defamation League should give its PR firm a serious talking-to.

Why Ideology Abhors Intelligence

Did you ever ask yourself something along these lines: "How the Bush Cult could be so densely unobjective? If it were an organism, how could it survive?"

If it were an animal, it might be something like a powerful, relentless, and reflexively aggressive octopus. It would make reassuring cooing noises and effect a charming wiggly dance while drawing close to the food it most delights in: amethyst. When it sensed danger, it would vent its bowels and twirl its arms to spread a noxious cloud while retreating to a safe distance, where it would cunningly arrange its bulk to resemble an anemone. Then it would wait for the threat to leave, and if that didn't occur quickly enough, it would summon its mates for an attack from the rear in overwhelming force. Roll with me as I play with this "Bush Administration as Sea Creature" idea.

Physically fierce as it may be, the "bushtopus" in my mind's eye is indifferent to other species, particularly so when feeding. It will slaughter a school of tuna to get at an ounce of amethyst, and while not blind, it is radically unobservant, remarkably lacking in anything like normal levels of environmental curiosity. It is terribly vulnerable because it is easily fooled and susceptible to traps. It can't help itself. This, along with its limited capacity for adaptation, makes it a prime candidate for extinction if competitors or predators learn to exploit its weaknesses.

Well. That was fun. In real life, I still have difficulty figuring these bozos out because I ascribe some level of rationality to anyone who can form sentences. So, as comprehension of the polymorphic methods and forms of the Bush Administration's stupidity begins to gel and impinge into my consciousness, some new jarring, jerking, bouncing, banging shock of dumbness is pulled, and it's clear I don't understand the organism at all. Sometimes I think, "Satire is dead. Ground sloths weren't that stupid."

But then I snap out of it. Plenty of leaders have been as stupid for as long. I've read about some of them. And, I used to belong to a cult and devoted nearly every ounce of my being to bring converts into it, so I have direct insight into their mental processes and why they act as they do. The problem is, they're raging ideologues who believe their own bullshit. Ideology is powerful, but it blinds the vessel. It cannot objectively behold itself. Regarding the uninitiated, the ideologue expects most of them to "get religion" and convert when the benefits have been demonstrated. Those who refuse the blessings, it considers condemned as unfit, and any dissenters are beyond redemption. The death of someone so pathological is not a cause for sorrow, merely mild regret. "If only they would've woken up, and been saved," is the refrain.

There is very little room in the cult's world-view for understanding the enemy. As a member, it's counterproductive, even dangerous to try because your time and efforts are best spent attending to and demonstrating your own righteousness. Your adherence to righteous doctrines not only reinforces your belief, it maintains and improves your status with the other ideologues you spend almost all your time with. So you don't become exactly blind to your enemies. They just don't interest you.

This is why we had "bad intelligence" on Iraq. This is why we have no intelligence on Iran. Or more accurately, the intelligence is there, but it is covered with a Bullshit Curtain, since ideology will not allow itself to be trumped, contradicted, or led by facts. And when things go badly, ideologues are so fully invested in their convictions that it's too expensive for them to admit to being fooled. That would lead them to doubt, which is a pathetic state. They have three modes of decision-making: selection bias; confirmation bias; and denial.

Begin To Win

Click. Watch.

Russ Feingold (D-WI) represents our best chance for Congress to get control of an unending Global War on Terra. He recognizes that taking funding away from the war is the way to stop it. He's on the Judiciary Committee, and is holding hearings this week on how Congress should best go about it. He's promising to introduce legislation which sets a deadline, after which Iraq gets de-funded. In 1971, Congress did not approve a Nixon request for additional Vietnam war financing. It was that Congressional vote, not any brilliant statesmanship by Secretary of State Henry Kissinger, which effectively ended American troop presence in Vietnam. "We will not take funds away from our troops," a frequent Dimocrat talking point, should instead be changed to, "We're approving funds to bring them home." That's where he's going with his hearings.

I realize Feingold probably won't get meaningful legislation passed fast enough, and only a miracle can stop Cheney and the Ziocons from blowing up the world as soon as they swallow their last Space Cakes. If you want to try and stop it anyway, as I assume you do, then the Progressive Patriot's Fund is the best place I know of to support.

Go. Give. At least you'll be on the record for doing the right thing. And you never know. It just might work:

http://www.progressivepatriotsfund.com/

(Hat tip to the esteemed Hope at Deep Confusion for surfacing this Feingold vid.)