Sources cited in this video: Rashida Tlaib’s speech to American Muslims for Palestine. The Intercept dissects the dishonesty of the response to it. Those brain-dead tweets. George Orwell, “Politics and the English Language,” 1946. Other Stuff: Last week, Jewish Currents published an
So Peter if your argument here is that Tlaib has been misinterpreted than tell us directly: do you think it’s possible to be progressive and pro-Israel? Is it possible to be progressive and a Zionist (people like Linda Sarsour have already said they don’t think so)? Is it possible to be progressive and support Israel’s government?
By the way, you may not be aware of this, but tonight is Erev Rosh Hashanah, which means you may not hear from actual Jews who care about Judaism on this blog for a while. But I must say it’s interesting that’s how you choose to spend your high holiday carrying water for one of Israel’s most venomous critics, with a history of anti-Semitic comments as well. Fortunately Yom Kippur is right around the corner if you want to try and seek forgiveness.
Again Professor Beinart I urge you and others here to deal with the facts.
First about Israel within the Green Line where Arab citizens vote almost as often as Israelis (and in a higher percentage than American voters). In fact, Arabs are represented in Israel’s Knesset by 15 representatives and one Arab party was the Kingmaker for the current government in Israel—and Israel’s supreme court has an Arab judge. Trying to compare land laws in Israel to America is a silly idea. In America Turner can buy all of Montana and no one will stop him because in America land is private. In Israel the state owns the lands. And the State plans usage. Many other countries have similar state land controls.
Now let’s go to the territories: Gaza and the West Bank. Israel does not control elections in Gaza Hamas does! Nor does Israel control elections in the West Bank, the Palestinian Authority does. The fact that they don’t have elections has to do with who is in power in those areas NOT Israel.
As for Rashida Tlaib as a Palestinian American she has her perspective. But let’s be clear about one aspect of Palestinian history past and present, Democracy has never been a high priority for them--it' not a feature of the Arab Middle East--it's never been a high value proposition there. In fact, not having locally chosen leaders has cost them dearly over the years, from the 1948 partition to Barak’s and later Olmert’s offers for statehood.
I understand definitions change and you can call Israel Apartheid, but Israel is not an Apartheid state as South Africa was, and it is profoundly inappropriate to tag it as such. The fact that South African leaders call Israel Apartheid has more to do with the fact that they have always sympathized with the Palestinian Narrative—It has nothing to do with apartheid. In Apartheid South Africa blacks could not vote, in fact could not even stay in white cities overnight, could not marry outside their race and all facilities were segregated. None of this feature in Israel but hey today we can redefine everything as George Orwell points out in many of his writings.
I disagree with Tlaib in many ways but don't consider her anti-semitic. But it's someone ironic for you to cite Orwell while describing the criticism Tlaib has received as an "assault".
It's legitimate for Tlaib to strongly disagree with Israel's policies even if she is sometimes wrong. It's also legitimate for Tlaib's critics to strongly disagree with her perspective, even if they're wrong.
And while I have no problem with you describing these critics as "intellectually dishonest" if that's what you believe, calling their responses "an assault" is going way too far. Last month we all witnessed an assault on a writer in upstate New York by someone who disagreed with them. Let's not minimize despicable acts like that by confusing strong words, even if they're unfair, with violence.
Thanks again for an excellent presentation. You might also have commented on the ritualistic evocation of Israel's "right to exist"in the comments you cited.
Well, is the gun the threat or the hand that holds it? Ukraine would not be a threat to Russia without 30 years of US deliberate undermining of Russia with increasing hybrid attacks politically, economically and militarily - but somehow this is almost completely disregarded by the MM media in the US. People look to you Peter to expose the gaslighting not just with respect to Israel - Palestine, but with respect to critical issues such as the calculated vilification of Russia and China in particular that serves the purpose of greasing the skids of war.
I very much appreciate your intellectual honesty which is in very short supply among the commentariat. And I certainly agree that progressive values cannot be reconciled with any apartheid government, including Israel's. The political pushback, piling on, and hysterics is quite surreal given that Rep. Tlaib's statement is irrefutable. But then one must be very careful not to say what cannot be said as determined by the dominant zeitgeist. You've given me a good reason to read Orwell's essay again.
But I do disagree with your Putin analogy because there is a strong factual basis supporting Russia's claim that Ukraine is a threat to its national security. The steady eastward expansion of a hostile military alliance to Russia's borders, the U.S. engineered Maidan coup and resulting civil war in the Donbass, the Western sabotage of the Minsk Agreements, the Rand study recommending the break-up of Russia into smaller states to serve U.S. national security interests, NATO's massive build-up of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, NATO's training and arming of those troops, and the Western sabotage of a Russian/Ukrainian peace agreement negotiated last April in Istanbul can be fairly interpreted as presenting a threat to Russia's sovereignty and territorial integrity.
Peters analysis of the response to Rashida Seems quite clear and understandable. What I find mystifying is how he dismisses Russia’s justifications for its invasion as being the same kind of repetitive sloganeering, while it seems that this is exactly what the United States is doing sloganeering without ever addressing the facts that Russia and Putin have detailed in justification for the invasion.
I appreciate your earnest efforts to throw light on the issues you take up, Peter Beinart. I have a small comment: please resist the tendency to punctuate your remarks with "right?" "right?" that so many speakers fall into these days. I find it an off-putting habit.
Thanks so much for this beautiful piece. Eloquently described. I am not in politics at all, just a poet, yet I can feel that same political pressure not to write poetry that touches on this subject, although I notice Palestinians who do face worse consequences. Of course, it’s easier to say “poetry shouldn’t be political” and not sound “Orwellian.” (Maybe we shouldn’t name this after him.) Or simply, not publish it. “It’s subjective.” But my point is this pressure is felt in weirdly pervasive ways across quite a spectrum. There’s something threatening about this kind of speech that doesn’t just threaten politicians. It feels, without being one, like a death threat. And it’s been going on for years. We used to be neighbors with a congressman back in the 80’s who confided in my husband that nobody in Congress can say anything in favor of Arabs or Palestinians, and to criticize Israel was absolutely verboten. He was privately critical of this, but wanted to keep his political job. I suppose this is now hardly a secret. So I can’t help but admire Rashida Tlaib and others for speaking out on this.
"It is all a world turned upside down with Israel controlling Washington, as former prime ministers Ariel Sharon and Benjamin Netanyahu have boasted, and part of the control mechanism is to manage the narrative so the American public never really sees what is going on. But what is really interesting is how so-called peace activists, like at the gathering I attended, toe the line and are terrified of offending Israel or the powerful domestic Jewish groups that use their money and political access to promote the wars in the Middle East as well as against Russia in Ukraine. Some of them clearly are fearful of being labeled anti-Semites, which is the weapon most frequently used by groups like ADL to ward off criticism of the Jewish state."
Thank you, Prof. Beinart, for bringing attention to Orwell's brilliant essay. I feel out of my depth with regard to the history and politics of Israel and Palestine, but I appreciate your commitment to intellectual honesty, factual truth, and democracy. For my own thoughts on a radical, promising model of democracy, see my Substack post on Democracy-by-Lottery. Perhaps an answer to the intractable situation in the region of Palestine: https://nickcoccoma.substack.com/p/to-save-america-we-need-democracy
Orwell's political writings are more necessary than ever these days, what with the rise of the far right at home and abroad. I especially revere his review of Mein Kampf and his essay "The Lion and the Unicorn." I recently listened to Nineteen Eighty-Four in the car (you know, just for kicks). Hadn't read it since high school and found it even scarier now. I try to weave in Orwell in my own Substack posts, such as a recent one on politics and the power of story: https://nickcoccoma.substack.com/i/70024356/iii-whoever-tells-the-best-story-wins.
Perhaps you might plug it with your readers. Shanah tovah!
So Peter if your argument here is that Tlaib has been misinterpreted than tell us directly: do you think it’s possible to be progressive and pro-Israel? Is it possible to be progressive and a Zionist (people like Linda Sarsour have already said they don’t think so)? Is it possible to be progressive and support Israel’s government?
By the way, you may not be aware of this, but tonight is Erev Rosh Hashanah, which means you may not hear from actual Jews who care about Judaism on this blog for a while. But I must say it’s interesting that’s how you choose to spend your high holiday carrying water for one of Israel’s most venomous critics, with a history of anti-Semitic comments as well. Fortunately Yom Kippur is right around the corner if you want to try and seek forgiveness.
Again Professor Beinart I urge you and others here to deal with the facts.
First about Israel within the Green Line where Arab citizens vote almost as often as Israelis (and in a higher percentage than American voters). In fact, Arabs are represented in Israel’s Knesset by 15 representatives and one Arab party was the Kingmaker for the current government in Israel—and Israel’s supreme court has an Arab judge. Trying to compare land laws in Israel to America is a silly idea. In America Turner can buy all of Montana and no one will stop him because in America land is private. In Israel the state owns the lands. And the State plans usage. Many other countries have similar state land controls.
Now let’s go to the territories: Gaza and the West Bank. Israel does not control elections in Gaza Hamas does! Nor does Israel control elections in the West Bank, the Palestinian Authority does. The fact that they don’t have elections has to do with who is in power in those areas NOT Israel.
As for Rashida Tlaib as a Palestinian American she has her perspective. But let’s be clear about one aspect of Palestinian history past and present, Democracy has never been a high priority for them--it' not a feature of the Arab Middle East--it's never been a high value proposition there. In fact, not having locally chosen leaders has cost them dearly over the years, from the 1948 partition to Barak’s and later Olmert’s offers for statehood.
I understand definitions change and you can call Israel Apartheid, but Israel is not an Apartheid state as South Africa was, and it is profoundly inappropriate to tag it as such. The fact that South African leaders call Israel Apartheid has more to do with the fact that they have always sympathized with the Palestinian Narrative—It has nothing to do with apartheid. In Apartheid South Africa blacks could not vote, in fact could not even stay in white cities overnight, could not marry outside their race and all facilities were segregated. None of this feature in Israel but hey today we can redefine everything as George Orwell points out in many of his writings.
I disagree with Tlaib in many ways but don't consider her anti-semitic. But it's someone ironic for you to cite Orwell while describing the criticism Tlaib has received as an "assault".
It's legitimate for Tlaib to strongly disagree with Israel's policies even if she is sometimes wrong. It's also legitimate for Tlaib's critics to strongly disagree with her perspective, even if they're wrong.
And while I have no problem with you describing these critics as "intellectually dishonest" if that's what you believe, calling their responses "an assault" is going way too far. Last month we all witnessed an assault on a writer in upstate New York by someone who disagreed with them. Let's not minimize despicable acts like that by confusing strong words, even if they're unfair, with violence.
Thanks again for an excellent presentation. You might also have commented on the ritualistic evocation of Israel's "right to exist"in the comments you cited.
Shanah tovah
Well, is the gun the threat or the hand that holds it? Ukraine would not be a threat to Russia without 30 years of US deliberate undermining of Russia with increasing hybrid attacks politically, economically and militarily - but somehow this is almost completely disregarded by the MM media in the US. People look to you Peter to expose the gaslighting not just with respect to Israel - Palestine, but with respect to critical issues such as the calculated vilification of Russia and China in particular that serves the purpose of greasing the skids of war.
another great commentary. I am really enjoying the video format.
I also want to wish you Shana Tova, and all the best for the coming year.
I very much appreciate your intellectual honesty which is in very short supply among the commentariat. And I certainly agree that progressive values cannot be reconciled with any apartheid government, including Israel's. The political pushback, piling on, and hysterics is quite surreal given that Rep. Tlaib's statement is irrefutable. But then one must be very careful not to say what cannot be said as determined by the dominant zeitgeist. You've given me a good reason to read Orwell's essay again.
But I do disagree with your Putin analogy because there is a strong factual basis supporting Russia's claim that Ukraine is a threat to its national security. The steady eastward expansion of a hostile military alliance to Russia's borders, the U.S. engineered Maidan coup and resulting civil war in the Donbass, the Western sabotage of the Minsk Agreements, the Rand study recommending the break-up of Russia into smaller states to serve U.S. national security interests, NATO's massive build-up of the Armed Forces of Ukraine, NATO's training and arming of those troops, and the Western sabotage of a Russian/Ukrainian peace agreement negotiated last April in Istanbul can be fairly interpreted as presenting a threat to Russia's sovereignty and territorial integrity.
Great arguments as usual. It is sad to see democrats playing the game of an authoritarian state. Great job Prof Beinart!
Peters analysis of the response to Rashida Seems quite clear and understandable. What I find mystifying is how he dismisses Russia’s justifications for its invasion as being the same kind of repetitive sloganeering, while it seems that this is exactly what the United States is doing sloganeering without ever addressing the facts that Russia and Putin have detailed in justification for the invasion.
I appreciate your earnest efforts to throw light on the issues you take up, Peter Beinart. I have a small comment: please resist the tendency to punctuate your remarks with "right?" "right?" that so many speakers fall into these days. I find it an off-putting habit.
Thanks so much for this beautiful piece. Eloquently described. I am not in politics at all, just a poet, yet I can feel that same political pressure not to write poetry that touches on this subject, although I notice Palestinians who do face worse consequences. Of course, it’s easier to say “poetry shouldn’t be political” and not sound “Orwellian.” (Maybe we shouldn’t name this after him.) Or simply, not publish it. “It’s subjective.” But my point is this pressure is felt in weirdly pervasive ways across quite a spectrum. There’s something threatening about this kind of speech that doesn’t just threaten politicians. It feels, without being one, like a death threat. And it’s been going on for years. We used to be neighbors with a congressman back in the 80’s who confided in my husband that nobody in Congress can say anything in favor of Arabs or Palestinians, and to criticize Israel was absolutely verboten. He was privately critical of this, but wanted to keep his political job. I suppose this is now hardly a secret. So I can’t help but admire Rashida Tlaib and others for speaking out on this.
Thanks for this Peter.
A few other resources addressing the same Israeli Hasbara, planned, structured, and funded:
Israel’s Linguistic Acrobatics [Book Review]
https://sbahour.medium.com/israels-linguistic-acrobatics-book-review-fef9cf79991d
The Idea of Israel: A History of Power and Knowledge
https://www.versobooks.com/books/1117-the-idea-of-israel
Hardly a conspiracy theory, more a fact.
"It is all a world turned upside down with Israel controlling Washington, as former prime ministers Ariel Sharon and Benjamin Netanyahu have boasted, and part of the control mechanism is to manage the narrative so the American public never really sees what is going on. But what is really interesting is how so-called peace activists, like at the gathering I attended, toe the line and are terrified of offending Israel or the powerful domestic Jewish groups that use their money and political access to promote the wars in the Middle East as well as against Russia in Ukraine. Some of them clearly are fearful of being labeled anti-Semites, which is the weapon most frequently used by groups like ADL to ward off criticism of the Jewish state."
The Best Congress AIPAC Can Buy. https://www.foreignpolicyjournal.com/2016/03/22/the-best-congress-aipac-can-buy/
Thank you, Prof. Beinart, for bringing attention to Orwell's brilliant essay. I feel out of my depth with regard to the history and politics of Israel and Palestine, but I appreciate your commitment to intellectual honesty, factual truth, and democracy. For my own thoughts on a radical, promising model of democracy, see my Substack post on Democracy-by-Lottery. Perhaps an answer to the intractable situation in the region of Palestine: https://nickcoccoma.substack.com/p/to-save-america-we-need-democracy
Orwell's political writings are more necessary than ever these days, what with the rise of the far right at home and abroad. I especially revere his review of Mein Kampf and his essay "The Lion and the Unicorn." I recently listened to Nineteen Eighty-Four in the car (you know, just for kicks). Hadn't read it since high school and found it even scarier now. I try to weave in Orwell in my own Substack posts, such as a recent one on politics and the power of story: https://nickcoccoma.substack.com/i/70024356/iii-whoever-tells-the-best-story-wins.
Perhaps you might plug it with your readers. Shanah tovah!
Thank you Peter, despite giving Bret Stephens a voice and prominence here, you have done the right thing by publishing Said's essay.
Amen, brother! Amazing how Orwell just gets better and more relevant with time. Beinart too!