Strenger than Fiction / Loyalty oath is not about Arabs, it’s about hatred of liberal values

[whosinpower]

http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/strenger-than-fiction/strenger-than-fiction-loyalty-oath-is-not-about-arabs-it-s-about-hatred-of-liberal-values-1.318406

snip - They cannot stand the idea that a liberal democracy should be based on rational legislation and is open to criticism by all. They are furious that tribal loyalty is not above criticism. Just lately, national religious rabbis have claimed that studying at universities is a danger for young religious people, because they internalize too many enlightenment values.

We are really talking about a right-wing anti-liberal coalition united by an instinctive hatred against the idea that there are universal standards of rationality and of morality. They do not want to hear criticism of their worldviews that relies on ideas that have, for a long time, been common to the free world. What we are seeing is a fight about Israel’s cultural and political identity.

snip - It is a truly terrible tragedy: we Jews have suffered throughout history from repressive, authoritarian regimes that accused Jews of not being sufficiently German, French, Russian or Spanish. We Jews have experienced the blessing of the enlightenment ideals that allow Jews around the world to live dignified lives and participate in liberal democracies. And the Jewish state is about to gradually erase these values, enshrined in Israel’s Declaration of Independence.

[azurnoir]

1. Thank you I agree with this analysis of Israel's current condition

but I would love to hear from some of Strenger's proclaimed fans on this board

[shira]

2. Strenger overstates but is still correct...

America has its pledge of allegiance. The UK makes non-Anglican new citizens swear allegiance to the supreme governor of that church and ‘defender of the faith’.”

But I don't see anyone worried that the USA or UK is becoming fascist despite waging wars in 2 countries thousands of miles away from their mainland.

:shrug:

==========

Israel's liberals are under assault not only from the Right but also from the anti-Zionist Left.

All enemies of Israel hate liberal values.

[shaayecanaan]

3. I don't think either of those other examples are fascist...

Atheists probably have a problem with the phrase "under God" but otherwise the pledge of allegiance is non-sectarian. Republicans have a problem with swearing allegiance to the Queen, but I have not yet met anyone who considered swearing allegiance to the Queen as having a sectarian element.

A true comparison would be having to swear allegiance to the Anglo-Saxon state of England, or the Protestant state of America. I have previously sworn allegiance to the Queen (I was required to upon my admission to the profession within which I currently work); however I would obviously refuse to swear allegiance to either of those other examples.

Of course, its worth noting that this loyalty oath only applies to non-Jews. I suspect the reason you don't find this fascist in any way has more to do with you than Strenger.

Do you think that Jews and Gypsies living in Germany should have to swear allegiance to the Teutonic and Democratic State of Germany?

[Violet_Crumble]

5. Something else. There is no separate UK citizenship oath for non-Anglicans..

There's no separate oath for non-Anglican new citizens. In fact, the religion of a new citizen doesn't come into it at all. The reason new UK citizens swear allegiance to the Queen is because she's their head of state, and if anyone were to try to make out that an oath all take regardless of religion or ethnicity which swears allegiance to the head of state is the same as an oath which is only for non-Jewish citizens and clearly aimed at Israeli Arabs and their Palestinian partners and which has been peddled by some rather fascist types in the Israeli govt, then they're really missing something important...

[shira]

7. But it's not an oath to anything religious....

It's a dumb idea but it's still an oath to the homeland for Jews, not the Jewish religion.

[azurnoir]

8. So who's a Jew ? how is that defined and more over what

does one have to prove to get married as a Jew in Israel these days? You cansay it's not about religion till your blue in the face but somewhere along the likne religion comes into it .

[shira]

9. Red herring much? n/t

[azurnoir]

12. Not at all it was an honest question one I wondered about long before this n/t

[shaayecanaan]

10. Makes no difference...

If you have two peoples living in one State it is fascist to make one swear allegiance to the other. The Flemish in Belgium are not going to swear loyalty to the Walloons. The Rwandan Hutus are not going to swear loyalty to the Tutsi state of Rwanda. It doesnt matter whether the distinction is ethnic, religious or otherwise.

This is just a guaranteed recipe for conflict, pure and simple. The fact that Israel has accomodated ultra-orthodox concerns by not making Jews swear loyalty to the State makes it hypocritical as well.

[azurnoir]

11. True enough however I was curious with all this talk about not religion and such n/t

[shira]

13. It's not about a swear of allegiance to another people.

Also, I agree the idea is hypocritical. It's also dumb.

I suspect, however, the problem some have with this idea is they're against a simple recognition of Israel as the permanent homeland for Jewish people and their right to self-determination, which of course is bigoted.

[Donald Ian Rankin]

20. Of course it's not bigotted.

Demanding that the Jewish people have a right to self determination is immensely bigotted, just as demanding that the white people or the black people do; opposing that bigotry is just basic decency.

Jewish should people have a right to self-determiniation - as a British Jew, I should have a right to vote for the British government.

The Israeli people should have a right to self determination - all citizens of Israel should have a right to vote for the Israeli government.

The Jewish people should not have a right to self-determination, because the right to vote for a government comes from being native to that government's area of rule.

[shira]

25. It's actually antisemitic according to the EU 's definition of antisemitism

"Denying the Jewish people their right to self determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor."

http://www.zionismontheweb.org/antisemitism/EU-definition-of-antisemitism.htm

[Donald Ian Rankin]

31. Well, at least you're consistent in your dishonesty.

Following your link, I find that the passage you quote is, of course, not describes as intrinsically antisemitic; rather, it's from a list of ways in which antisemitism sometimes manifests.

Would I be wrong in guessing that you already knew that? If this was an honest mistake, there may still be time to correct your post...

[shira]

35. Let's see who's honest, shall we? Let's review some of the EU's working definition...

"Denying the Jewish people their right to self determination, e.g., by claiming that the existence of a State of Israel is a racist endeavor."

In addition to wanting to deny Jews the right to self-determination, you feel the existence of Israel and/or Zionism is racist - right?

=========

"Applying double standards by requiring of it a behavior not expected or demanded of any other democratic nation."

Have you done this before, Donald? How do you feel when others here do this?

=========

"Drawing comparisons of contemporary Israeli policy to that of the Nazis."

Ever done this, Donald? What do you think about people who do this here constantly?

=========

Finally, since you probably believe there's nothing wrong with anyone exhibiting any one of those types of views - tell me what you think about people who routinely criticize Israel using a combination of those views.

I'll wait...

:)

[azurnoir]

14. This is America's oath taken when getting citizenship

I hereby declare, on oath, that I absolutely and entirely renounce and abjure all allegiance and fidelity to any foreign prince, potentate, state, or sovereignty of whom or which I have heretofore been a subject or citizen; that I will support and defend the Constitution and laws of the United States of America against all enemies, foreign and domestic; that I will bear true faith and allegiance to the same; that I will bear arms on behalf of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform noncombatant service in the Armed Forces of the United States when required by the law; that I will perform work of national importance under civilian direction when required by the law; and that I take this obligation freely without any mental reservation or purpose of evasion; so help me God.<1>

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Oath_of_Allegiance_%28United_States%29

It does mention God but not in relationship to any particular religion

[whosinpower]

16. As far as I know

The US pledge does not differentiate who has to take the pledge.....and neither does the UK.

Perhaps I am wrong....perhaps there are those who wish to immigrate that are immune to taking the pledge....do you think this is so?

And, just so we are clear - the State of Israel has always required that a person naturalizing as a citizen of Israel to declare that "I am a loyal citizen of the State of Israel."
A pledge has always been there.

Strenger believes that Lieberman hates the liberal values of Israel. And you say he overstates (probably due to him calling it fascist) but he is correct. And then you state ALL enemies of Israel hate liberal values. So, I can assume then that it is your belief that Lieberman is an enemy of Israel.

[shira]

18. Yes, RW'ers like Lieberman and LW antizionists are both enemies of liberals as well as Israel. n/t

[txaslftist]

21. All enemies of Israel don't hate liberal values.

Some of us hate unanswered attacks on US military vessels and the unanswered murders of our citizens like Rachel Corrie or the young man on the flotilla vessel who was executed.

Some of us hate to see the indigenous population of Palestine put in an open air ghetto.

Some of us hate to see the way accusations of antisemitism are hurled with abandon at anyone who criticizes Israel.

Some of us hate the disgusting way that pro-Israel lobbying groups screen candidates for US office.

Some of us hate the way that the US military is used to enforce Israel's will in the middle east.

Some of us hate the way the Palestinians are degraded and mistreated and humiliated every day by the disgusting IDF.

Has nothing to do with liberal values and everything to do with Israel's style of governing.

[oberliner]

22. Unanswered attacks in US military vessels?

What answer would have been appropriate?

[txaslftist]

24. Depends on who you ask.

We declared war over the Main and the Lusitania and the Gulf of Tonkin incidents involving so-called attacks on US Ships at sea, so a declaration of war wouldn't have been without precedent. Permanently cutting off aid would have certainly been a very good idea.

I think intervening in that little "war" that was going on in favor of the Arabs would have been a proportionate and appropriate response.

Getting Israel to admit they attacked the Liberty on purpose and treating the survivors as something other than crap to be swept under the rug would have been good things to do.

Certainly recognizing that Israel is by no means an ally would have been a great place to start.

[oberliner]

26. There was almost no US aid to Israel at that point

Jordan, for example, received significantly more aid from the US at the time and they were one of countries Israel fought in the 1967 war.

US aid to Israel didn't really kick off significantly until years later.

And Israel paid out millions of dollars to those injured in the Liberty attack and to the families of those who were killed (as well as for the damage to the ship itself).

You think the US should have invaded Israel in 1967 in response to the Liberty incident?

Do you think the UK should have invaded the US in 2007 in response to the convoy attack?

That aside, as the incident was over forty years ago, do you really think it is relevant to the current geopolitical situation?

[txaslftist]

29. You bet it's relevant.

When Israel claims to be our "ally" their deliberate attack on one of our warships -even though it was 40 years ago- is definitely relevant.

[oberliner]

32. I think you have some mistaken info

The Liberty was a friendly fire incident - not a deliberate attack.

[LeftishBrit]

23. 'the way that the US military is used to impose Israel's will in the Middle East'..

When has this ever happened?

Now the use of the US - and British - military to impose the Bushies' will in the Middle East is another matter!

[txaslftist]

27. Iraq

http://walt.foreignpolicy.com/posts/2010/02/08/i_dont_mean_to_say_i_told_you_so_but

[whosinpower]

33. That article makes it clear

That the origins of the Iraq war came from Washington - NOT ISRAEL. It was George W. Bush' baby. He dreamed it, he hatched it - and America must bear the burden for its execution...and failure.

Did they go to Israel for support - sure they did. Let us not be so forgetful that we close our minds to the FACT that Saddam promised to lob missiles at Israel if he was ever attacked.

The entire blame for the war lies at the feet of George W. Bush. He WANTED it so badly - he even promised the Israeli's that in exchange for their support, Iraq would be one small step towards a transformed middle east that also included a war in Iran. HE DID THIS....not Israel.

He is to blame....and all the millions who voted for him. The very idea came from him. The execution of the war - was the responsibility of HIS administration and the blind, deaf, and dumb Congress. The cost of the war is America's burden. The rise in power and influence of Iran in the middle east is a direct result of Bush stupidity and American arrogence.

[txaslftist]

28. Iran

http://www.guardian.co.uk/commentisfree/cifamerica/2009/may/13/aipac-iran-us-obama

[whosinpower]

34. Yeah? Well....

If America and the Brits were not so ARROGENT back in the 50's to overthrow a democratically elected president in Iran....perhaps if Operation Ajax never occured.....none of this would be an issue today.

But....sadly the OILigarchs could not stand the natives renegotiating their oil royalties......so Operation Ajax was born.....the Shah was installed......hatred of the west festered....and the rest is history.

[whosinpower]

30. Intellectually lazy

A person can "hate" all those things, and still not hate Israel, nor be an enemy of Israel, nor proclaim oneself to be an enemy of Israel.

[Violet_Crumble]

4. That's a really good article...

He's absolutely on the money with what he says. From all I've heard and read about this so-called loyalty oath, it is aimed directly at Israeli Arabs and Palestinians. It's the clear bigotry of the law that should make it totally unacceptable to all reasonable people who place equality before nasty manifestations of 'tribal' loyalty...

[kayecy]

6. Strenger has one take on the Loyalty oath but this JP op ed looks more likely......

Title: Rattling the Cage: Any more doubts about Bibi?
By LARRY DERFNER


http://www.jpost.com/Opinion/Columnists/Article.aspx?id=191287


"THIS WEEK, Netanyahu reaffirmed his ideological covenant with Lieberman, the settlers and the rest of the far right – and they are riding high. They’ve got a slew of other anti-Arab, authoritarian laws to pass – and who’s going to stop them? The Labor Party? Kadima? Diaspora Jewry? Washington? The media?
.
.
.
Where is it leading? Without trying to be too original, I think it’s leading to Netanyahu bombing Iran. He wants to; he’s made that clear enough over the years. Who’s going to stop him? The Republicans will cheer him on. Afterward, after the big war, we’ll see if there’s anything left to salvage."

Better start digging out your tin-hats and gas-masks!

[shira]

15. We need loyalty acts not Loyalty Oaths

Israel needs a smart, enlightened, citizenship policy maximizing individual rights while working out the complexities of minority groups' collective rights. Focusing on loyalty acts not loyalty oaths would start with the government ensuring that Arab schools are as well-funded as Jewish schools and that every Israeli Arab feels empowered to live freely and prosper fully in the Middle East's one true democratic state.

Good citizenship and good governance both demand mutuality. In fulfilling its obligations to its citizens, the state also makes demands. We need universal national service not loyalty oaths. Every young Israeli - male or female, religious or secular, Arab or Jew, should devote a minimum of two years of national service. Considering Arabs' current sensitivities, we should only compel their service within Israeli Arab political units or institutions. But they should have opportunities to volunteer in venues that serve the entire nation - and that could get young Israeli Muslims, Christians and Jews working together on quality-of-life projects. Such actions would encourage much more social cohesion than any combination of words force-fed down people's throats.

Yes, it is true, Israel is being judged by yet another double-standard. When Canadian immigrants swear allegiance to the Queen, it is charmingly anachronistic. When Americans pledge allegiance to the flag, it is red-white-and-blue patriotic. Yet when Israelis propose loyalty oaths it becomes oppressive.

http://cgis.jpost.com/Blogs/troy/entry/needed_loyalty_acts_not_loyalty

[whosinpower]

17. I agree with this

But I am pretty sure Lieberman does not.....

[LeftishBrit]

19. Entirely agree with this article (though it's both)

Anti-Arab prejudice and anti-liberalism.

It's a rich irony that the Right are demanding allegiance to Israel 'as a Jewish and democratic state', when they themselves are attempting to undermine the 'democratic' part.