When Amnesty International earlier this month joined the chorus of human rights groups accusing Israel of practicing apartheid, my mind wandered to Jimmy Carter. America’s 39th president wasn’t the first person to affix the Scarlet A to the Jewish state. Palestinian intellectuals have been
The accusation of apartheid isn't new. It really started after the Durban conference in 2001, in which an impressive collection of anti-Semites got together and decided that the new smear of choice going forward would be "apartheid". That makes it over twenty years old at this point. Carter got a large reaction when he published his book because most people hadn't heard that libel yet. Now it's just one in a Rolodex of talking points that people like Beinart cycle through when they want to smear Israel and undermine its legitimacy.
Anti-Semites and Israel haters have been accusing Jews of racism for wanting their rights and a state of their own since before Israel existed, for example in the "Zionism is racism" UN resolution. Some on this very Substack argue that exact point to this day. Likewise, Israel's treatment and relationship with the Palestinians hasn't changed much in the past twenty years either, if anything it's gotten better. There are no large scale pitched battles on the streets of the West Bank for example and thousands of Palestinians work in Israel every day.
The only thing that has changed is the media outlets that Beinart identifies have shifted to pushing more extreme points of view and their views on Israel followed suit. They have made it clear their journalism is based on the extreme left's politics so of course their treatment of Israel will be following in lockstep. Again, Israel hasn't changed, it's the positions of these ivory tower American leftists that have.
If you need evidence that their views are ideological and not impartial, look at their lack of coverage of the treatment of Palestinians in Lebanon. In December, the Lebanese government passed a law that Palestinians were banned from numerous professions including law, engineering and medicine. In addition, Palestinians in Lebanon cannot buy land and have no path to citizenship. By any real definition of apartheid, Lebanon fits it to a tee. So where's the accusations from HRW and AI and the New York Times and Slate and Peter Beinart that Lebanon is an apartheid state? I certainly can't find any, and actually no one can, because they don't exist, which is odd since Beinart claims the accusations of Israel's apartheid is because of "pro-Palestinian sentiment." You would think impartial media outlets and NGOs that care about truth and accuracy and are so "pro-Palestinian" would treat all countries equally and hold all countries to an equal standard. But they don't, because they're not impartial, they're ideological, and Beinart pretty much admits that above. That's why the accusation is not being taken seriously, and just being ignored.
The main problem is not that Israel has become illiberal. Its America that has become illiberal. More precisely it is the unwillingness of the left and on the right to dela with historical truths or facts as opposed to favorite group propaganda.
Just to cite a few examples. Mr. Beinart writes about Israel’s Nation State Law as an example of Israel’s illiberality. He writes that the Arabic language has been demoted. That is not what it states. It clearly states. (b) The Arabic language has a special status in the State;. (c) Nothing in this article shall affect the status given to the Arabic language before this law came into force.” That’s clear enough.
Mr. Beinart and others object to the nation state Law. It sounds illiberal and limiting. By the way has he checked the Nation State Law of Jordan? Article 1. The people of Jordan form a part of the Arab Nation, Article 2: Islam is the religion of the State and Arabic is its official language. How about Greece. I will spare you it has more than 3 paragraphs detailing it is a Chritsian Ccountry of the Eastern Chrch and Jesus is Christ . You get the message. I know people who won’t visit Israel because it’s a religious illiberal state but they have been to both Jordan and Greece and the latter multiple times.
As for apartheid, as anyone who has lived in South Africa and Israel will tell you. In Israel Arabs can vote; in Israel Arabs are part of the coalition government and on the supreme court. And they can marry whomever they like according to their rites. None of these things was even remotely possible for Black people in South Africa. That is why the white ruling class in South Africa came up with the term Apartheid—to distinguish it from other forms of discrimination.
The problem as you can see here is simply a lack of knowledge on the part of the progressive left and of course the right-wing nuts suffer from their own delusions such as “Jews will not replace us”.
Wow. You are quite the leftist. Your jerking the steering wheel so hard it’s going to break and you’ll be stuck right there with the rest of the hard left when you finally hit the wall in November. I’m sorry- that has to be rough. But you will wake up some day soon and realize that the “vast majority of Americans” actually support moderate Israel, want guns, and detest radical leftists and communists who just can’t stop hating themselves and their ostensible countrymen. Have a nice thrilling trip while it lasts. I’ll keep reading as long as I can hold my lunch down. I wanted to see how the TNR sausage is made, and I think I need a bucket already.
Peter, have you seen the Jonathan Demme documentary "Jimmy Carter Man from Plains"? Worth watching. It's about the "Peace, not Apartheid" book tour. People refused to understand his position then and so many do not understand it now.
Great column as usual Peter. By the way, I would like you to write about the alleged connections between Hamas and Latin America and the Palestinian diaspora here.
The accusation of apartheid isn't new. It really started after the Durban conference in 2001, in which an impressive collection of anti-Semites got together and decided that the new smear of choice going forward would be "apartheid". That makes it over twenty years old at this point. Carter got a large reaction when he published his book because most people hadn't heard that libel yet. Now it's just one in a Rolodex of talking points that people like Beinart cycle through when they want to smear Israel and undermine its legitimacy.
Anti-Semites and Israel haters have been accusing Jews of racism for wanting their rights and a state of their own since before Israel existed, for example in the "Zionism is racism" UN resolution. Some on this very Substack argue that exact point to this day. Likewise, Israel's treatment and relationship with the Palestinians hasn't changed much in the past twenty years either, if anything it's gotten better. There are no large scale pitched battles on the streets of the West Bank for example and thousands of Palestinians work in Israel every day.
The only thing that has changed is the media outlets that Beinart identifies have shifted to pushing more extreme points of view and their views on Israel followed suit. They have made it clear their journalism is based on the extreme left's politics so of course their treatment of Israel will be following in lockstep. Again, Israel hasn't changed, it's the positions of these ivory tower American leftists that have.
If you need evidence that their views are ideological and not impartial, look at their lack of coverage of the treatment of Palestinians in Lebanon. In December, the Lebanese government passed a law that Palestinians were banned from numerous professions including law, engineering and medicine. In addition, Palestinians in Lebanon cannot buy land and have no path to citizenship. By any real definition of apartheid, Lebanon fits it to a tee. So where's the accusations from HRW and AI and the New York Times and Slate and Peter Beinart that Lebanon is an apartheid state? I certainly can't find any, and actually no one can, because they don't exist, which is odd since Beinart claims the accusations of Israel's apartheid is because of "pro-Palestinian sentiment." You would think impartial media outlets and NGOs that care about truth and accuracy and are so "pro-Palestinian" would treat all countries equally and hold all countries to an equal standard. But they don't, because they're not impartial, they're ideological, and Beinart pretty much admits that above. That's why the accusation is not being taken seriously, and just being ignored.
The main problem is not that Israel has become illiberal. Its America that has become illiberal. More precisely it is the unwillingness of the left and on the right to dela with historical truths or facts as opposed to favorite group propaganda.
Just to cite a few examples. Mr. Beinart writes about Israel’s Nation State Law as an example of Israel’s illiberality. He writes that the Arabic language has been demoted. That is not what it states. It clearly states. (b) The Arabic language has a special status in the State;. (c) Nothing in this article shall affect the status given to the Arabic language before this law came into force.” That’s clear enough.
Mr. Beinart and others object to the nation state Law. It sounds illiberal and limiting. By the way has he checked the Nation State Law of Jordan? Article 1. The people of Jordan form a part of the Arab Nation, Article 2: Islam is the religion of the State and Arabic is its official language. How about Greece. I will spare you it has more than 3 paragraphs detailing it is a Chritsian Ccountry of the Eastern Chrch and Jesus is Christ . You get the message. I know people who won’t visit Israel because it’s a religious illiberal state but they have been to both Jordan and Greece and the latter multiple times.
As for apartheid, as anyone who has lived in South Africa and Israel will tell you. In Israel Arabs can vote; in Israel Arabs are part of the coalition government and on the supreme court. And they can marry whomever they like according to their rites. None of these things was even remotely possible for Black people in South Africa. That is why the white ruling class in South Africa came up with the term Apartheid—to distinguish it from other forms of discrimination.
The problem as you can see here is simply a lack of knowledge on the part of the progressive left and of course the right-wing nuts suffer from their own delusions such as “Jews will not replace us”.
Amnesty: "Israel is apartheid!"
USA, Canada, Germany, and Australia: "No it isn't."
Amnesty: "Aww."
Hamas: "We agree with you Amnesty!"
Amnesty: "Shut up Hamas you're not helping."
Very nice article, thank you for it.
Wow. You are quite the leftist. Your jerking the steering wheel so hard it’s going to break and you’ll be stuck right there with the rest of the hard left when you finally hit the wall in November. I’m sorry- that has to be rough. But you will wake up some day soon and realize that the “vast majority of Americans” actually support moderate Israel, want guns, and detest radical leftists and communists who just can’t stop hating themselves and their ostensible countrymen. Have a nice thrilling trip while it lasts. I’ll keep reading as long as I can hold my lunch down. I wanted to see how the TNR sausage is made, and I think I need a bucket already.
Peter, have you seen the Jonathan Demme documentary "Jimmy Carter Man from Plains"? Worth watching. It's about the "Peace, not Apartheid" book tour. People refused to understand his position then and so many do not understand it now.
Great column as usual Peter. By the way, I would like you to write about the alleged connections between Hamas and Latin America and the Palestinian diaspora here.