Re: Saima Alvi's Contribution to Understanding

Paul,

        Thanks.  I just read your comment, after sending my own homily.
Yes, let us never forget that we are given all this baloney about races
and nationalities courtesy of the capitalist world-system, trading, as is
its wont, on any traditional divisions or follies that it can adapt to its
uses.

        Warren



On Tue, 1 Oct 2002, Paul Gomberg wrote:

> Depends on what you mean by "racist." Most important, politics is not
> determined by the "racial" and "national" categories that capitalism
> gives us. Those who hate racism (oppression grounded in racial and
> similar categories) should reject nationalism. Nationalism, even of
> oppressed peoples, actually contributes to racism by uniting us with our
> enemies of the same "race" and dividing us from our allies. I am an
> internationalist.
>
> Paul
>
> Khaldoun Samman wrote:
>
> > Paul, if a black living under Apartheid identifies South Africa with
> > whites and understands his suffering to be perpetrated by whites, does
> > that make him or her a racist?
> >
> > Khaldoun
> >
> >  Paul Gomberg wrote:
> >
> >      I want to second Matthew Caygill's comment. The anti-Semites
> >      and Zionists share
> >      a premise: the identification of Israel with "the Jews" or
> >      "Jews." So for the
> >      anti-Semite any Israeli brutality is perpetrated by "the
> >      Jews" and for some
> >      Zionists any criticism of Israel is anti-Semitism, an attack
> >      on "Jews"
> >      generally.
> >
> >      Paul
> >
> >      "Caygill, Matthew [CES]" wrote:
> >
> >      > Oddly the quote given doesn't contain anything like the
> >      anti-semitism that
> >      > is alleged, whereas the comments about the 'whole world'
> >      and nothing needing
> >      > to be said about it seemed to me like a version of the
> >      generalisation that
> >      > the proposed rule 13a would prohibit - even if cast in the
> >      negative. And
> >      > this sort of discourse is really a very familiar attempt
> >      to prevent
> >      > criticism or opposition to Israel.
> >      >
> >      > > -----Original Message-----
> >      > > From: lr [SMTP:luca269_up2000@hotmail.com]
> >      > > Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 10:23 AM
> >      > > To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu
> >      > > Subject: Re: Saima Alvi's Contribution to Understanding
> >      > >
> >      > > I have to thank you because I missed that article. It
> >      seems that you need
> >      > > a second read, because it is just a collection of
> >      others' quotations. Many
> >      > > of them quite factual and/or authoritative. Did you
> >      check its sources?
> >      > > Regards.
> >      > > l.
> >      > >
> >      > > ----- Original Message -----
> >      > > From: Kessler Adam <?xml:namespace prefix = mailto />
> >      > > To: wsn@csf.colorado.edu
> >      > > Sent: Tuesday, October 01, 2002 5:10 AM
> >      > > Subject: Saima Alvi's Contribution to Understanding
> >      > >
> >      > >
> >      > >
> >      > >
> >      > > In the 19th century it was deemed perfectly acceptable
> >      > > for educated, well-meaning people to make
> >      generalizations about ethnic,
> >      > > religious or national groups along the lines of: "the
> >      Irish are
> >      > > drunkards," or "the Negroes are happy-go-lucky," or "the
> >      X are a
> >      > > commercial race." Then around 60-70 years ago with the
> >      rapid rise of
> >      > > modern racism this began to change. Expressions of this
> >      type slowly
> >      > > disappeared from civilized discourse. It is unimaginable
> >      for example, for
> >      > > someone on this list to utter a sentence like "the
> >      blacks are criminals,''
> >      > > even though prisons throughout America are filled with
> >      black people.
> >      > >
> >      > > The piece by Mark Weber which Alvi is disseminating
> >      > > demonstrates that there is one people about whom such
> >      sentences can still
> >      > > (or again?) be spoken: "the" Jews. The article itself
> >      consists of layers
> >      > > and layers of lies, non sequiturs, and paranoia: in
> >      other words the most
> >      > > standard kind of old-fashioned anti-Semitism, which is
> >      apparently
> >      > > acceptable nowadays in some circles, especially on what
> >      might be called
> >      > > "the stupid left." It is useless to try to disentangle
> >      such stuff. One
> >      > > comment will suffice: Kofi Annan is quoted as saying
> >      that "the whole world
> >      > > is demanding that Israel withdraw [etc., etc.]. I don't
> >      think the whole
> >      > > world...can be wrong." The "whole world" presumably
> >      consists of the 191
> >      > > members of the U.N. Among these are countries such as
> >      Libya, Sudan and
> >      > > Syria which are regarded as perfectly respectable,
> >      eligible to serve on
> >      > > the U.N. Commission on Human Rights, etc. Nothing more
> >      needs to be said
> >      > > about "the world."
> >      > >
> >      > > But I wish to make a more general contribution to
> >      > > current discourse on this list and elsewhere. And that
> >      is to formulate a
> >      > > set of modern debating rules. Rule 13a goes like this:
> >      > >
> >      > > Rule 13a:
> >      > > If in the course of a debate participant P
> >      > > states: the X are Y (where for X substitute a religious,
> >      ethnic national
> >      > > or "racial" group and for Y substitute some attribute,
> >      positive or
> >      > > negative) then P is a jerk.
> >      > >
> >      > >
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > -----------------------------------------------------------------------
> > Do you Yahoo!?
> > New DSL Internet Access from SBC & Yahoo!
>