Neighborhood Bully, by Bob Dylan the Zionist
Newsletter published on 19 October 2016
(1) Neighborhood bully, by
Bob Dylan the Zionist
(2) Bob Dylan, Nobel Laureate - Adeyinka Makinde
(3)
Neighborhood bully: Deconstructing the Lyrics of Bob Dylan in the
light of
the Gaza Crisis
(4) White tears from Israel
(1) Neighborhood Bully, by
Bob Dylan the Zionist
https://cameosfromzion.blogspot.com.au/2016/05/neighborhood-bully-dan-israel-blood-on_26.html
Thursday,
May 26, 2016
"Neighborhood bully"
Artist: Bob Dylan Album:
Infidels Released: 1983
Well, the neighborhood bully, he's just one
man
His enemies say he's on their land
They got him outnumbered about a
million to one
He got no place to escape to, no place to run
He's the
neighborhood bully.
The neighborhood bully he just lives to
survive
He's criticized and condemned for being alive
He's not supposed to
fight back, he's supposed to have thick skin
He's supposed to lay down and
die when his door is kicked in
He's the neighborhood bully.
The
neighborhood bully been driven out of every land
He's wandered the earth an
exiled man
Seen his family scattered, his people hounded and torn
He's
always on trial for just being born
He's the neighborhood bully.
Well,
he knocked out a lynch mob, he was criticized
Old women condemned him, said
he could apologize
Then he destroyed a bomb factory, nobody was glad
The
bombs were meant for him. He was supposed to feel bad
He's the neighborhood
bully.
Well, the chances are against it, and the odds are slim
That
he'll live by the rules that the world makes for him
'Cause there's a noose
at his neck and a gun at his back
And a licence to kill him is given out to
every maniac
He's the neighborhood bully.
Well, he got no allies to
really speak of
What he gets he must pay for, he don't get it out of
love
He buys obsolete weapons and he won't be denied
But no one sends
flesh and blood to fight by his side
He's the neighborhood
bully.
Well, he's surrounded by pacifists who all want peace
They pray
for it nightly that the bloodshed must cease
Now, they wouldn't hurt a fly.
To hurt one they would weep
They lay and they wait for this bully to fall
asleep
He's the neighborhood bully.
Every empire that's enslaved him
is gone
Egypt and Rome, even the great Babylon
He's made a garden of
paradise in the desert sand
In bed with nobody, under no one's
command
He's the neighborhood bully.
Now his holiest books have been
trampled upon
No contract that he signed was worth that what it was written
on
He took the crumbs of the world and he turned it into wealth
Took
sickness and disease and he turned it into health
He's the neighborhood
bully.
What's anybody indebted to him for ?
Nothing, they say. He just
likes to cause war
Pride and prejudice and superstition indeed
They wait
for this bully like a dog waits to feed
He's the neighborhood
bully.
What has he done to wear so many scars ?
Does he change the
course of rivers ? Does he pollute the moon and stars ?
Neighborhood bully,
standing on the hill
Running out the clock, time standing
still
Neighborhood bully.
(2) Bob Dylan, Nobel Laureate - Adeyinka
Makinde
http://www.globalresearch.ca/about-bob-dylan-nobel-laureate-a-lightning-rod-for-contentious-debate-and-polarized-views/5551458
http://adeyinkamakinde.blogspot.com.au/2016/10/about-bob-dylan-nobel-laureate-and.html
About
Bob Dylan – Nobel Laureate: "A Lightning Rod for Contentious
Debate and
Polarized Views"
By Adeyinka Makinde
Global Research, October 17,
2016 Adeyinka Makinde 16 October 2016
Did Bob Dylan deserve the Nobel
Prize for Literature? Not to those who
feel that an award for literature
cannot be based on writing popular
music songs and publishing a book on
prose poetry. While Dylan’s
influence on rock music cannot be denied, he
nonetheless serves as a
lightning rod for contentious debate and polarized
views.
For many, Bob Dylan, nee Robert Zimmerman, is a living legend and
quite
simply a genius. He is an American icon; one in a long line of unique
characters hailing from a culture where the capacity for self-invention
is seemingly limitless. In this case, Dylan, the descendant of eastern
European Jews raised in a small town in the American Midwest became an
important figure in an age of tumultuous social change during which
there was a marked evolution in the forms of popular musical
expression.
One revolutionary aspect of Bob Dylan’s early career was his
part in
nullifying ‘Tin Pan Alley’-style lyrics as the only viable vehicle
for
expressing popular music. This ‘Shakespeare in the alley’ changed the
way rock musicians could write songs. Think of the imagery he conjures
in songs like "All Along the Watchtower", "Jokerman" and "Blind Willie
McTell". His influence on fellow musicians was profound. Think of the
Byrds and the Beatles for starters.
And don’t forget that sounding
like a screeching, electrocuted poor
kitty cat didn’t stop that
controversial aspect of his package from
being influential. Fans of Jimi
Hendrix should give Dylan a lot of
credit for inspiring him to sing.
Hendrix, the story goes, was
self-conscious about his voice and only really
took to singing because
he felt that he stood a chance if the whinny-voiced
Dylan could become
successful in the business.
But Dylan has always
been a polarizing figure right from the time he
plugged his guitar into an
electric socket. The folk purists never
forgave him. Also unforgivable to
many of the ideological Left was his
support for political Zionism clearly
enunciated in the song
‘Neighborhood bully’. Dylan, they claim had praised
Meir Kehane and
never retracted this even though the two major bodies that
Kehane
founded, the Jewish Defense League and the Israeli Kach Party, were
both
extremist organisations which were later proscribed.
And of
course, unforgivable to many is the perception of Dylan as a
sell-out to the
values to which he had professed as he was propelled to
fame and fortune.
They argue that he imitated the folk hero activist
mantle of Woody Guthrie
and Pete Seeger but only used the protest
movement as a pathway to personal
enrichment and a means of opening the
door to membership of the social
elite. In this way, Dylan, it is
argued, is no better than those purveyors
of the 1960s ‘counter culture’
who had by the 1980s reinvented themselves as
agents and functionaries
within the capitalist system.
The popular
view of Dylan as a rebel has worn thin with the passage of
time. Songs of
social protest gave way to ruminations of a personal and
religious form. It
is fair to say that Dylan did not have to bear the
turmoil of threats to his
life and livelihood as did the musician
purveyors of Tropicalismo who had to
flee from the clutches of the
Brazilian military junta of the 1960s and
1970s, or the Nigerian Fela
Kuti who suffered beatings and imprisonment at
the hands of successive
military governments or Bob Marley who survived an
assassination attempt
by gunmen with a political motive.
If the
question were asked as to what tangible change a political
musician such as
Jackson Browne achieved from his protests on behalf of
the environment and
against the United States backed authoritarian
governments of Latin America,
the response might be that Dylan did not
even bother trying.
Dylan’s
award of the Nobel Prize is not its first controversial award.
The
committee’s award to Barack Obama that of its Peace Prize was
criticised
since the incoming president had not presided over any
successful peace
initiative. The award of that prize to the former Irgun
terror chief
Menachem Begin and Anwar Sadat, who as a young Egyptian
officer had been
willing to cooperate with the advancing Wehrmacht if
they could secure his
country’s independence, while based on an
unexpected peace treaty in a
troubled region, was in time criticized by
those who believe that only a
comprehensive peace settlement and not
separate treaties will bring true and
lasting peace to that area of the
world.
There has always been the
suspicion of a political basis in regards to
Nobel awards.
Does the
committee favour those who work within the English language
above others?
Are developing countries given a fair appraisal? There are
suspicions of a
rotation system among the continents. For instance, when
Japan was about to
receive its first award for literature, it was felt
that Yukio Mishima, the
most prominent Japanese writer of his time was
the favourite. But Mishima
later ruled himself out of contention when he
discovered that his early
mentor Yasunari Kawabata was in the reckoning
and wanted consideration.
Kawabata won. Mishima had written a note of
recommendation to the Nobel
committee in Kawabata’s favour and died
having correctly prophesized that
when Japan’s ‘turn’ came again, it
would be his rival Kenzaburo Oe who would
be the more likely to succeed.
The award to Bob Dylan is baffling. While
it is true that Dylan has, as
the committee cited, created "new poetic
expressions within the great
American song tradition," song lyrics are not
poems and many poets may
tend to eschew the use of instruments as part of
their range of
expression. He has only written one book of prose poetry and
an
autobiography. Meanwhile, those writers who have been genuinely
innovative and experimental in form and content have been
ignored.
Perhaps the members of the Nobel Prize giving board are just
sentimental
old hippies.
Adeyinka Makinde is a writer based in
London, England
(3) Neighborhood bully: Deconstructing the Lyrics of Bob
Dylan in the
light of the Gaza Crisis
http://adeyinkamakinde.blogspot.com.au/2014/07/neighborhood-bully-deconstructing.html
(c)
Adeyinka Makinde (2014)
Monday, 28 July 2014
Neighborhood bully:
Deconstructing the Lyrics of Bob Dylan in the light
of the Gaza
Crisis
The ongoing assault conducted by the armed forces of the state of
Israel
on the Palestinian enclave of Gaza has, yet again, brought stark
images
to the world of the devastating capabilities of the awesome military
machinery at the disposal of the 66-year old Jewish state.
As
occurred in Lebanon back in 1982 and more recently in Gaza during
Operation
Cast Lead of 2009, Israel, while insisting that it is acting
in justifiable
self-defence and for the preservation of the safety of
its citizens, has
mounted a military response which has wrought quite
devastating
consequences.
Bombs and missiles unleashed from the ground, the skies and
the sea have
reigned in on Gaza destroying swathes of buildings, wiping out
whole
families and permanently scarring the overwhelmingly non-combatant
victims.
Images of decapitated babies, horrendously deformed children,
and the
look of sheer terror in the eyes of a dishevelled and disconsolate
civilian population have pervaded the media.
It is a situation unlike
that of the past when Israel fought against the
standing armies of
surrounding nation states each of whom it routed in
the wars of 1948, 1967
and in 1973.
The Palestinian population of Gaza, hemmed into a blockaded
strip of
land that is subject to the constant scrutiny of the Israeli
security
apparatus, are effectively a defenceless people in possession of no
tanks, no jet aircraft or naval vessels.
They are themselves the
refugees and the descendants of refugees who
were forcibly removed or who
fled from their homes at the time of the
war which led to the creation of
Israel.
The outrage felt by much of the world centres on what many
consider to
be the infliction of a disproportionate level of violence on the
Palestinian population under the pretence that the measures are targeted
and that any collateral damage -to use the cruel euphemism- is the fault
of Hamas, which callously uses its own people as human shields.
John
Kerry, the secretary of state of the United States and himself of
Jewish
origin, was heard to mutter off-camera that Israel was conducting
what he
termed "a hell of a pin-point operation".
Nonetheless, the leaders of the
United States, Britain and France have
remained largely muted and have
insisted that Israel reserves the right
to act in self-defence against
Hamas.
In the belief of the Israeli chiefs of state and the majority of
its
citizenry, Israel is justified, and is not, to utilise a useful term, a
‘neighbourhood bully’.
Israel as a ‘bully’ is a theme which was once
explored through the
musical lens of Bob Dylan. And condensed in its lyrical
expressions are
a rationale based on the historical experiences of the
Jewish people;
riddled as it is with numerous persecutions, the afflictions
of
perpetual insecurity and the enduring dream of Zion.
The
Minnesota-born singer-songwriter, an acknowledged genius and a
confirmed
legend when barely into his twenties, has been the purveyor of
lyrics which
have consistently provoked debate and detailed analysis
among his fans and
the music critics.
Deconstructing the labyrinth of words and phrases
typically employed by
Dylan has over the years become something of a
sport.
Yet few, if any, have succeeded in pinning down a universally
accepted
explanation of many of the meanings in regard to which the author
has
tended to maintain either a studied silence or to offer a series of
bland and imprecise ruminations during interviews.
Like the decoding
of ancient esoteric texts, they remain a mystery to
the masses.
But
if interpreting Dylan’s lyrics have been laborious exercises which
have
frequently failed to penetrate the enduring enigma, the words to
the song
Neighborhood bully presented a statement which is largely
spared the opacity
that is the typical fare of Dylan lyrics.
The song forms part of the
album named Infidels which was released in
October of 1983 on Columbia
Records. The record came after years of
discussion about his apparent
conversion to the Christian faith and the
gospel inflected albums which had
preceded it including Slow Train
Coming (1979) and Saved
(1980).
Infidels was seen as a return to a ‘secular’ album with
references to
love and loss, the environment, and the United States economy
as a
battlefield between opposing union and corporate
interests.
Nonetheless, Dylan’s penchant for the use of religious
reference points
persisted. The album’s introductory song, Jokerman, dense
with biblical
imagery and pregnant with moral analysis appeared to some to
be about
Jesus; the lines "Standing on the water casting your bread" in that
song
as well as "news of you has come down the line" and "in your father’s
house there’s many mansions" from Sweetheart Like You giving some
credence to this line of interpretation.
Long before the series of
albums which celebrated Christian themes,
Dylan had apparently found in
Jesus a figure of inspiration. The line
from All Along the Watchtower, a
stand out song from the seminal album
John Wesley Harding, "There must be
some kind of way outta here, said
the joker to the thief" is claimed to
allude to Christ on the cross
alongside the two convicted criminals as they
bleed to death on Mount
Calvary.
Infidels represented a drift from
his excursions into Christian
spirituality. And if not an outright
renunciation of Christianity, it
did present him as been back among the fold
of the Jewish tribe, as the
inner jacket features him crouched and in
contemplation while wearing a
yarmulke on Jerusalem’s Mount of
Olives.
The song Man of Peace with the line "you know that sometimes
Satan comes
as a man of peace" was interpreted as a backslap directed at the
evangelists who had converted him and the words "Took a stranger to
teach me to look into justice’s beautiful face, And to see an eye for an
eye and a tooth for a tooth" from I and I seemingly confirmed the
breach.
Dylan the apostate Jew did not sit well with many Jews whose
ancestors
for centuries suffered persecutions visited on them by European
Christian communities. Indeed, one Washington-based rabbi felt compelled
to ‘excommunicate’ Dylan from his record collection.
Traditional
Christian doctrine of course held the Jews and their
descendants to be
responsible for the execution of Christ, and this
antipathy is held out as
the rationale for the numerous incidents of
group libels, pogroms and
expulsions.
But the ancient antagonism between Judaism and Christianity
was not
birthed in medieval Christian Europe. Nor was it
one-sided.
Jesus, although tutored and practised in the rites of ancient
Judaism,
was considered a heretical preacher and according to Talmudic
scripture,
a sorcerer and self-idolator who after death, was conjured to
life by
Jewish priests in order to face four different executions and as a
punishment for his heresies is boiling for eternity in a cauldron of
human faeces.
Later, credit would be given to the Chasidic scholar
Rabbi Manis
Freidman for steering Dylan back to his Judaic origins. He was
reported
as attending study meetings with the Lubavitch Hasidim in
Brooklyn.
But although Dylan had claimed in 1985 to still believe in the
Book of
Revelations, the following decade, in an interview with Newsweek
magazine, he would claim "I don’t adhere to rabbis, preachers,
evangelists, all of that."
Dylan had long supported the cause of
Israel and this support may have
played a part in his break with the
political Left in the 1960s. He is
said to have reproved the ‘Black Panther’
Revolutionary Huey Newton for
his opposition to Israel, and his famous
‘comeback tour’ of 1974 was
rumoured to have substantially contributed to
the coffers of the Israel
Emergency Fund.
Played in a rockabilly mode
and sang with heavy irony, Dylan sets out
Israel’s case amid the accusations
of its iron-fisted dealings with its
Arab neighbours. It is a song which is
said to be particularly popular
with the Likudniks as an after-party
conference boogie-down number, and,
according to the Jerusalem Post, "a
favourite among Dylan-loving
residents of the (Israeli-occupied)
territories".
The year before the release of Infidels, tired of border
incursions and
other acts of terror directed at settlements on its northern
border,
Israel had invaded Lebanon in an attempt to destroy the Palestinian
militias who were based in that country.
A grand slaughter of
thousands ensued as the Israeli Defence Force
advanced through the country
and bombs reigned in on the capital city of
Beirut where Yasser Arafat’s
Palestinian Liberation Organisation
eventually became besieged.
The
city was itself reduced to heaps of rubble and became for all
intents and
purposes a wasteland. After a negotiated agreement which
provided that the
P.L.O. be allowed to depart by ship to Tunis,
Palestinian families based at
the Shabra and Shatilla camps on the
outskirts of Beirut were massacred by
Christian militias with the
connivance of the Israeli military who were
under the direction of the
ruling Likud Party’s defence minister, former
General Ariel Sharon.
Under more valorous circumstances, the Israeli Air
force had
demonstrated its professional acumen in destroying a high
proportion of
its Syrian counterpart in just a few hours fighting over the
Bekaa Valley.
But the cost of the Lebanese mission in terms of the
destruction of
human life and property inspired widespread revulsion and the
opprobrium
of many from around the world.
Israel, the ‘small’ nation
which had valiantly defeated combined Arab
armies in the Six Day War of 1967
and whose special forces had contrived
an audacious rescue of hostages at
Entebbe Airport in 1976, had fallen
markedly in the esteem of wide sections
of world public opinion.
It had in the eyes of many become a
‘neighbourhood bully’.
It was in this context with the reputation and
moral authority enjoyed
by Israel being at an all-time nadir since its
creation that Dylan wrote
the song.
The song begins by stating two
key precepts underscoring the Zionist
world view.
The first that the
enemies of Israel "claim he’s on their land" serves
as a rebuke to those who
deny the legitimacy of the historic claim to
the land of Israel by the
Jewish people insisted on by Zionist ideology.
The second, that he is
"outnumbered by a million to one" posits the
frequently alluded to
representation of Israel as the underdog; a small
state surrounded by
hostile nations whose sheer vastness in numbers
continually present a threat
to its existence.
The second phase of the song underlines the ages-long
reason for the
creation of a Jewish state:
Being driven out of every
land
He’s wandered the earth an exiled man
Seen his family scattered,
people hounded and torn
He’s always on trial for just being born
The
Jew is portrayed as a perpetual victim in regard to who, according
to Dylan,
a "license to kill him given out to every manic".
But there is pride in
his survival instinct as "every empire that
enslaved him is gone: Egypt and
Rome even the great Babylon".
Given this background, Dylan ruminates with
heavy irony that he is "not
supposed to fight back and have thick skin,
supposed to lay down and die
when his door is kicked in"; this a reference
not only to wars fought
with Arab armies and incursions made by Palestinian
guerrillas into
Israeli territory but also the gnawing feeling among Jews of
the passive
submission to a bestial fate which is suggestive of the
Holocaust
imagery of Jews being herded into gas chambers without fighting
back.
Thus, with biting humour, Dylan decries the supposition that "he’s
surrounded by pacifists who all want peace" and recounts how "when he
knocked out a lynch-mob, old women condemned him; said he should
apologize".
In the earlier decades of the 20th Century, Ze’ev (nee
Vladimir)
Jabotinsky, the man acknowledged as the founding father of the
Israeli
Defence Force, had sought to create a new species of man; namely
that of
the "fighting Jew".
And for Dylan the survival of Israel is
impliedly predicated on such
species of person who can be directed to
neutralise all threats to its
existence. The song’s reference to the
destroying of a "bomb factory"
alluded to the destruction in 1981 of the
Osirak nuclear reactor being
built by the regime of Saddam
Hussein.
Criticism of Israel’s right to exist and its ‘counter-measures’
appear
to him to be predicated on anti-Semitism, the basis of which,
according
to Dylan’s words, is both inexplicable and irrational: "Does he
(meaning
the Jew) change the course of rivers, does he pollute the moving
stars?"
he asks.
The Jew after all, he sings, has contributed so much
to civilization and
special mention is made of the scientific advances which
have been made
by people of Jewish origin via the lines: "took sickness and
disease and
turned them into health".
And of the achievement of
Israel, "he’s made a garden and a paradise in
the desert sand".
The
following lines are an instructive indication of the Jewish-Zionist
mindset:
He got no allies to really speak of
What he gets he must
pay for
He don’t get it out of love
What Dylan appears to be saying is
that what the Jewish state acquires
is as a result of hard-bargaining.
Israel is ultimately alone and must
be self-reliant.
The advances
made towards the establishment and later the sustenance of
the Jewish state
have materialised through hard-nosed negotiations as
well as the formation
of some bizarre and unusual alliances, a number of
which have been
temporary.
The Balfour Declaration issued by the British in 1917, a
67-word text in
which the war-time foreign minister, James Arthur Balfour
viewed with
favour the establishment of a national home for the Jewish
people, was
as Winston Churchill later observed not a "mere act of crusading
enthusiasm or quixotic philanthropy".
It was issued he continued
"with the object of promoting the general
victory of the Allies, for which
we expected and received valued and
important assistance".
Such help
and assistance included mobilizing influential Jewish-American
figures in
media, industry and politics to bring the United States into
the war on the
side of the allies who were facing defeat by Germany in
the latter part of
1917.
For Balfour, a self-acknowledged anti-Semite who recoiled from the
idea
that Britain should accept more Jewish immigrants, a Jewish homeland
meant perfect sense. Affecting his view was also the fact that he was
what came to be termed a Christian Zionist.
The modern alliance
between Jewish-Israeli interests and Christian
Zionism has played a major
part in fortifying support within the United
States for the state of
Israel.
A fundamental plank of Christian Zionist-Dispensationalist
thinking is
that following the creation of the modern state of Israel, the
rebuilding of the temple in Jerusalem must form a necessary precursor to
the end days during which Christ’s chosen will be secretly
raptured.
American evangelical support for Israel is unconditional, and
over the
years their members have given millions of dollars to groups in
Israel
which are opposed to any form of concessions to the
Palestinians.
But the support granted by John Hagee, chairman of
Christians United for
Israel, and the likes of Pat Robertson and the late
Jerry Falwell, is
not predicated on a "love" for the Jews.
Their
eschatological doctrine is premised on the belief that the Jews,
who
rejected Jesus, will be given a final opportunity to accept Christ
and will
be put to the sword if they refuse.
Yet this bizarre, evidently mutually
beneficial, alliance persists with
the willing cooperation of both Diaspora
Jews and Israelis. The
Christian Zionists according to a quote attributed to
the Israeli Prime
Minister Benjamin Netanyahu function in the final analysis
as "useful
idiots".
The "he don’t get it out of love" sentiment has a
basis when reference
is made to the later discovery that prominent
non-Jewish supporters of
Israel and Jewish interests have harboured deep
resentments about Jews.
President Harry Truman, during whose tenure the
state of Israel received
United States recognition, noted in a 1947 diary
entry discovered in
2003 that he found Jews to be "very, very
selfish".
"When they have power", he continued, "Physical, financial or
political,
neither Hitler nor Stalin has anything on them for cruelty or
mistreatment to the underdog."
Similarly, the discovery of tape
recordings between Richard Nixon and
Billy Graham; the former whose
presidency staunchly favoured Israel and
the latter, the world famous
evangelist whose ministry was pro-Israeli,
in which both criticized the
policies of Israel and expressed negative
views about the influence of Jews
on American culture documented a
scenario in which a gentile supporter of
Israel had an unflattering
privately held view.
The line that "He got
no allies to really speak of" may ostensibly be
pooh-poohed by simply
recounting the special relationship between Israel
and the United States. It
is a relationship which is underscored by the
power and leverage exercised
by Israel-Jewish lobby groups in particular
that of the America-Israel
Public Affairs Committee (AIPAC).
Although America is seen as the great
ally and benefactor of the Israeli
state; demonstrated through its vetoing
of resolutions against it in the
United Nations and giving it military aid
to the tune of billions of
dollars every year, such an alliance is not
necessarily presumed to be
an everlasting one.
There is much truth to
the thesis that America has coldly considered
Israel to be a useful asset in
the Middle East during the Cold War-era
and beyond; as Vice President Joe
Biden said in a speech before AIPAC,
"If there weren’t an Israel, we’d have
to invent one."
The nagging suspicion is that as has occurred over the
ages with the
alliances forged between Jewish communities and powerful
figures and
nations, the Israel-America relationship will one day
expire.
The assertion by Moshe Dayan that Israel "must be like a ‘mad
dog’, too
dangerous to bother’ was based not only on the presumptive ‘Samson
Option’ which means Israel would utilise its nuclear arsenal to take
down the region and beyond if it was in danger of being defeated, but
also spoke to a scenario in which it would no longer be able to count on
the United States.
A key point of note is that by not specifically
once mentioning the
terms ‘Jew’ and ‘Israeli’ or ‘Judaism’ and ‘Zionism’,
Dylan inextricably
binds all together. His proposition is that Jewishness
cannot be
separated from Zionist sentiment and aspiration.
Eretz
Israel is the promised homeland for a rootless nation of people
–any and all
who have a right to live there- and the overwhelming
majority of Jewry
supports it.
But Zionism was not always the natural counterpart of
Judaism; indeed
the strict teachings of Judaism disavow the man-made
recreation of
Israel, considering such an enterprise to be an abomination.
Israel, the
scriptures provide, can only be created by the act of God. It
had few
adherents at the beginning of the 20th century.
Henry
Morgenthau Sr, a former US ambassador to Turkey portrayed it as
"the most
stupendous fallacy in Jewish history". He felt it to be
"fanatical in its
politics" and "sterile in its spiritual ideas".
The Jewish English
politician, Edwin Samuel Montagu who served in the
coalition government
during the First World War was as scathing,
describing it as a "mischievous
political creed" which he opposed
because he foresaw the trouble what be
believed to be a chauvinist
ideology would cause in Palestine with the
indigenous population and
also that accusations of dual loyalty would be
made against Jews who
lived in other states.
It was, he believed, a
project which would unleash the beast of
anti-Semitism.
Once upon a
time a distinction could be made between ‘Spiritual’ Zionism
as espoused by
Ahad Ha’am on the one hand and Theodore Herzl’s
‘Political’ Zionism on the
other.
Herzl’s creed would eventually carry the day; and although it
once, to
paraphrase Churchill, contended with Bolshevism for the soul of the
Jewish people, ‘Political’ Zionism became the universal doctrine for
world Jewry after the Shoah.
For the likes of Morgenthau and Montagu,
Zionism served as a rejection
of the Haskala, the 18th Century Jewish
Enlightenment movement which
posited the solution to anti-Semitism as being
the assimilation of Jewry
into Western secular culture.
The
contention by Jews who opposed it was on the premise that Zionism
represented a weary, doom-laden, pessimistic philosophy that Jews can
never be assimilated into ‘foreign’ societies and need to live apart in
a nation of their own.
It accepts the inevitability of anti-Semitism
among all non-Jews.
Ideally, all the world’s Jews should live in the state
of Israel,
although the reality is that most of them do not. In fact, there
are
more Jews in America than there are in Israel.
The line "He’s got
no place to escape to" is not correct since there
have been periods when
more Jews have left Israel than have settled in it.
But it does represent
the belief among many Jews that Israel is a home
which would serve as a last
refuge from the persecutions which have
dogged its people throughout
history.
It would be remiss to fail to mention the influence of the
Revisionist
Zionism as espoused by Jabotinsky on the formation of Israel as
well as
on the doctrines and policies of contemporary Israel which gives
insight
into the manner in which it deals with the occupied territory of the
West Bank and the besieged Gaza Strip.
In his book The Iron Wall,
Jabotinsky called on Zionists to drop all
pretence about reaching an
accommodation with the Arab population of
Palestine, insisting that in
attaining the goal of transforming
Palestine "from an Arab country to a
country with a Jewish majority" a
militaristic policy of colonisation must
be pursued.
In his words:
Zionism is a colonizing adventure and
therefore it stands or it falls by
the question of armed force
He was
aware that there would have to be opposition from Palestinian Arabs:
Each
people will struggle against colonizers until the last spark of
hope that
they can avoid the dangers of colonization and conquest is
extinguished. The
Palestinians will struggle in this way until there is
hardly a spark of
hope
This reality has underlain Israeli policy whatever the spin given to
the
purportedly defensive wars fought in 1948 and 1967. The heirs to
Jabotinsky are the founders of the ruling Likud Party through which its
hardliner leader, Menachem Begin –a mentee of Jabotinsky- first came to
power in the 1970s.
Begin often referred to the occupied West Bank as
historically Jewish,
namely the regions of Judea and Samaria. The father of
the current
Israeli Prime Minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, served for a time as
Jabotinsky’s secretary.
Likud and other parties simply will not
accept any form of Palestinian
statehood which would have the semblance of
an independent country.
While the Israeli government continues to permit
the building of
settlements on the West Bank in contravention of
international law, Gaza
is effectively blockaded by land and sea and cannot
conduct business
relations with the outside world in a conventional
manner.
The importation of items ranging from certain forms of concrete
to
crayon are banned and whatever is allowed through by Israel is subject
to a tax payable to the Israeli state. It is deprived of clean water
while at the same time in the West Bank access to natural water springs
is the preserve of illegal settlers.
The line "Does he change the
course of rivers" has some resonance
although not in the way Dylan
intended.
One often understated reason for the war of 1967 relates to the
acquisition of water resources. And under the auspices of the conquered
territory, Israel utilises over 70% of the aquifers. The Palestinian
population use less than 20% while the Israeli settlers, always growing,
but proportionally far less than the Palestinians use more than
10%.
To much of the world, the Palestinians hold out; valiantly refusing
to
succumb to what they perceive to be the crumbs offered by Zionism while
the Israelis insist that a failure on the part of Palestinian leadership
has been the impediment to achieving a two-state solution.
While
Israel continues to argue that it acts in self-preservation in
actions
vastly disproportionate to the damage caused by mainly home-made
Palestinian
rockets, much of the world community sees it as aggression
posed as
self-defence, and that the historical accounts of victimhood
are cynically
utilized in order to camouflage the contemporary reality
of the Jewish state
as an oppressor.
The actions of Hamas in firing a largely non-descript
collection of
projectiles which are referred to as ‘missiles’ most of which
by the
Israeli army estimates penetrated the so-called Iron Dome are the
actions of desperate people.
The projectiles are largely ineffectual
and only give Israel the excuse
it needs to mete out a collective form of
punishment with its large
array of sophisticated and highly deadly
arsenal.
If it need be reminded, all peoples are entitled under
international law
to resist occupation, and the designations of ‘terrorist’
and
‘terrorism’ are used by Israel without a trace of irony given the nature
of its creation by the terror actions of the Irgun and Stern gang as
well as the legacy of ethnic cleansing notably by the massacre
perpetrated at the Palestinian village of Deir Yassin – the site of
which stands ironically approximately 2000 feet from the Yad Vashem
Holocaust Museum.
When Begin formed the Herut Party, the precursor of
Likud, in 1948
Jewish luminaries including Albert Einstein and Hannah Arendt
wrote an
open letter to the New York Times describing it as an ominous
portent;
that Israel would head down a path which legitimized
"ultra-nationalism,
religious mysticism and racial superiority".
In
the Israel of today, a mainstream politician can advocate the killing
of
Palestinian women on the basis that they give birth to "little
snakes" while
a university professor seriously suggests the use of rape
as a weapon of war
against Palestinian sisters and mothers; positing the
culture of the Middle
East as the justification.
Under state policy Ethiopian Jewish women have
been surreptitiously
sterilised, and Sudanese and Eritrean refugees are
referred to as
‘infiltrators’ and are casually vilified. Edicts are issued
banning the
sale or renting of apartments and homes to
non-Jews.
Israel is a racially exclusive state where immigration is
subject to DNA
testing and where a non-Jew cannot legally marry a
Jew.
The linkage of Judaism with Zionism is one which creates uneasiness
in
an increasing number of Jews and non-Jews. The bombs which kill and maim
scores of innocents, the policies which constrict the everyday lives of
millions and which condone the theft of Palestinian land are done in the
name of the Jewish state.
David Goldberg, a London-based rabbi once
wrote that the time may have
come for "Judaism and Zionism to go their
separate ways". But this would
be a difficult task to achieve given the
aforementioned philosophical
shift which took place among world Jewry over
the course of the 20th
century.
Further, rabbis in Israel have given
religious sanction to the idea of
inflicting terror on the Palestinians. The
recently deceased Rabbi
Ovadia Yosef, once the chief rabbi for Israel’s
Sephardic community and
when the spiritual leader of the ultra-orthodox
Shas party which over
the years has formed coalition alliances with
Netanyahu’s Likud, called
for the annihilation of Arabs during a Passover
sermon delivered in 2001.
It is forbidden to be merciful to them. You
must send missiles to them
and annihilate them. They are evil and
damnable...waste their seed and
exterminate them and vanish them from this
world.
And during the present crisis, the Jerusalem Post reported a
rabbi’s
claim that Jewish law permits the destruction of Gaza in order to
bring
safety to Israel.
It echoes an uncompromisingly brutal counsel
from Rabbi Friedman, the
charismatic Chabad figure who redirected Dylan
towards Judaism, in
response to a question posed in Moment magazine’s "Ask
the Rabbis" feature.
The only way to fight a moral war is the Jewish way:
Destroy their holy
sites. Kill men, women and children (and
cattle).
Yet, Israel seems largely impervious to criticism; wrapped up in
what it
views as a justified self-righteous mentality.
It is a
mindset which some have compared to those of Afrikaner settlers
in Apartheid
South Africa and the European settlers in Algeria: The
outside world simply
does not understand. The methods employed may seem
harsh and bullying but
they are done in the name of self-preservation.
What the Zionist mindset
cannot demonstrate as being moral it has
nonetheless imposed through force
and given the history of suffering by
the Jewish people it has been a case
of Zionism ‘right or wrong’ so far
as its lobbying agents are
concerned.
As things stand, the two-state solution has for years been an
all but
dead proposition, and a one state solution would negate Zionist
aspirations and equate to national suicide.
The resilience of the
Israelis, their tenacity and ferocious resolution
to hold on to the state
which they have carved out is evident in Dylan’s
final
verse.
Neighborhood bully
Standing on the hill
Running out the
clock
Time standing still
It is an explicit statement that Zionist
Israel is determined to outlast
its enemies and its critics and intends to
persevere literally until the
end of time.
(4) White tears from
Israel
Eric Walberg<walberg2002@yahoo.com>
17
October 2016 at 23:02
http://ericwalberg.com/index.php?option=com_content&view=article&id=642:white-tears-from-israel&catid=39:europe-canada-and-us-&Itemid=92
White
tears from Israel
Monday, 17 October 2016 07:30
Eric
Walberg
The McGill Daily reported a serious problem. "White tears" have
increased sharply on campus "by 40% just in September this year". It's
not tears from tear gas or shootings, as happens every day in the
occupied territories, the result of routine Israeli acts of terrorism.
No, heaven forbid. It is the tears of anti-BDS students who complaint
about BDS activists, who see red when they see kippah wearing students
with pro-Israel, anti-BDS buttons and posters.
It's a satire. An
effective one. Good on you, Phlar Daboub. It hit home.
The anti-BDS
activists are in a tizzy. Political science student Jordan
Devon, the former
president of Israel on Campus, said the satire mocks
students who opposed
BDS."Our concerns about anti-Semitism are real," he
said. "This says that
Jewish concerns are a joke. Yet Jews are the No. 1
victims of hate crimes in
North America."
Boo, hoo. Someone calling you names? Wake up, Jordan.
Jews have never
had it so good. Canada embraces Jews, they are at the top of
the pecking
order. They/you get spurious legislation supporting Israel
passed in the
twinkling of an eye. Grow up. This is not high school. Learn
how to
behave in public and you will not be called names.
Jordan
quotes a 2015 Brandeis survey
(https://www.brandeis.edu/cmjs/noteworthy/antisemitism.html)
that shows
'alarmingly' that:
*One-quarter of undergraduate
respondents describe hostility toward
Israel on campus by their peers as a
"fairly" or "very" big problem and
nearly 15% perceive this same level of
hostility toward Jews.
*Nearly one-quarter of respondents report having
been blamed during the
past year for the actions of Israel because they were
Jewish.
*About one-third of college undergraduate respondents report
having been
verbally harassed during the past year because they were
Jewish.
*Despite a significant number perceiving their campus environment
to be
hostile to Israel and Jews, students report high levels of connection
to
Israel. These levels of connection are higher than those found among
similar individuals in 2014, before the Israel-Hamas conflict.
The
study reaches the no-brainer conclusion: Connection to Israel is the
strongest predictor of perceiving a hostile environment toward Israel
and Jews on campus and, to a lesser extent, of personal experiences of
antisemitic verbal harassment. It is likely that those who are highly
connected to Israel become a target of antisemitic or anti-Israel
sentiment because they make their support for Israel known.
Wow.
Imagine that. You've never felt an anti-Jewish sentiment all your
cosseted
life, then you join the 'Love Israel' club at McGill, and
suddenly you see
hostile faces. Your article extolling the Jewish state
is rejected by the
student paper. The editor Ben Ger says he prefers the
writings of the
anti-Zionist Jewish group Teyf (non-kosher).
Our Jordans want the
university to muzzle their foes, to force them to
print pro-Israeli hasbarah
(propaganda), lies defending a pariah state,
which murders its captives
willfully, denies normal freedoms to its Arab
citizens that we Canadians
take for granted.
The BDS activists are fed up with university rejection
of their rightful
demands to boycott Israel in McGill's investment
decisions. To them
'freedom of speech' is sacred. It means speaking truth to
power,
especially when the truth is unpopular. That means, in
Jewish-friendly
Canada, protesting Israeli atrocities, which our government
and McGill
are too cowardly to do. They are angry that our government passes
spurious laws to support Israeli hasbarah (propaganda) and denounce
Canadians speaking out for justice.
If Jordan wants to know about
real racism, he should speak with Muslim
or black or Indian (our First
Nation or east Indian) students, as Phlar
suggests in his satire. If you
wants to avoid hearing slurs connecting
you via your kippah with a racist
state, join the BDS movement. You will
be welcomed warmly, people will be
happy to wear kippahs in solidarity.
You will never hear a bad word about
Jews.
You'll hear a lot of bad words about Israel, because, as the
Brandeis
survey tells us, it's Israel that is the cause of anti-Jewish
prejudice.
It's because you identify with a pariah state that people don't
like
you. As Woody Allen told his Zionist brother-in-law: I may be
self-hating, but it's not because I'm a Jew.
Jordan' friend Jeff
Bicher, executive director of Hillel Montreal, also
whined: the BDS
situation has made Jewish students feel "it’s us versus
them." "It makes a
specific group uncomfortable and has poisoned the
atmosphere on campus,"
said Eden Moalem, an exercise science student at
Concordia.
"It’s a
situation that’s exploding on campuses everywhere, but seems
particularly
pronounced in Canada." Yes, Eden. Life is no paradise for
Palestinians,
though it is for Jews in Canada, if they are good Canadian
citizens. Not
flitting off to Israel, planting trees on flattened
Palestinian villages,
joining the IDF, and shooting people.
And be proud that Canadian students
are so empathetic to the world's
underdog, oppressed by people who have
kidnapped the name 'Jew' for
nefarious ends.
Jeff is right. It's us
versus them. Which side are you on? And be
prepared to stand up when you are
pilloried. Or, if you must support
Israel, just hold your breath til you
graduate. The mainstream media
welcomes hasbarah, and you will fit right
in.
No comments:
Post a Comment
Note: Only a member of this blog may post a comment.