Anti-Fascism, Anti-German, Anti-Semitism, Anti-Zionism…

    “In the beginning the Universe was created. This has made a lot of people very angry and has been widely regarded as a bad move.” ~ Douglas Adams

Stone the bloody crows, throw another shrimp on the barbie, and I tell you what, any boss who sacks anyone for not turning up today is a bum!


Once upon a time I was gonna ‘reply’ to Jean Barrot/Gilles Dauvé’s ‘Fascism/Anti-Fascism’ but: a) I couldn’t be arsed; b) it’s been done (to death) and; c) nobody cares what I think anyway. That said… other materials on Fascism (and fascism) what are worthwhile reading are Roger Griffin’s reader on Fascism (Oxford University Press, 1995) and Robert O. Paxton’s The Anatomy of Fascism (Random House, 2007). Otherwise, I’ve categorised a handful of posts ‘Anti-fascism’, so yeah: go read ’em.

Choice Anti-Fascism quote: “As one might expect of a group of people who, despite their ideological differences, all reject the fundamental organizing principles of Western societies, Antifa members do not seem to be high earners. It is also hard to see how a group of this nature could generate any reliable flow of funding of any sort, or who it would be prepared to accept it from.” (The Blackhoods of Antifa, From the mahogany desk of The Brussels Journal, October 10, 2008.)


While drawing on various (and overwhelmingly Marxian) ideological antecedents, the ‘Anti-German’ camp really only established itself in Germany after re-unification, and as one of many responses to a more general ideological crisis on Teh Left that the outpouring of nationalist sentiment this world-historical event provoked. One of the best Anti-German sauces I’ve tasted is ‘Anti-German Translation’: it’s regularly updated, and contains links to many other writings on the Anti-German tradition. Two overviews of the subject are available via ‘Letter from Berlin: The anti-anti-Zionists’ (Benjamin Weinthal, Haaretz, August 8, 2007) and ‘Antinationalist Nationalism: The Anti-German Critique and Its All-Too-German Adherents’ (Rolling Thunder, No.3, Summer 2006).

Choice Anti-German quote: ‘Do they ever have any fun? “We don’t have much fun,” Dahlmann concedes. “But we are not ascetics. We drink beer and wine”.’ (Meet the Anti-Germans, Luke Harding, The Guardian, August 28, 2006.)


A German hack named Wilhelm Marr is the man generally credited with coining the term ‘Anti-Semitism’ in the 1870s; in her book Scapegoat: The Jews, Israel, and Women’s Liberation, Andrea Dworkin (1946–2005) describes Bill as having been an ‘anarchist’. Whatever.

And now she has published what she believes to be her life’s work, nine years in the making; not another assault on gender relations or the sex industry but a polemical account of modern Israel and the lessons it holds for women. It is a book which many Zionists, non-Zionists, Palestinians, scholars of the Holocaust, pacifists, the left, women, men, are bound to find offensive. Scapegoat: The Jews, Israel And Women’s Liberation, sparked by a visit to Israel in 1988, is a critique of Middle East politics which sees the whole situation as a product of wounded and then enraged testosterone. It is an analysis of the Holocaust and Israel through the eye of gender relations, drawing together strands of Zionism, feminism and Holocaust studies to produce a radical new thesis: that the Jews, downtrodden, had to fight back; and that women, downtrodden, must do the same.

From memory, Dworkin concludes her survey with an appeal to women to seriously consider forming their own, ‘female’, state. A caustic review is available in ‘Dworkin’s Scapegoating’, Veronica A. Ouma, Palestine Solidarity Review, Fall 2005. See also : Prophet with honour the wilderness, Michael Arditti, The Independent, June 10, 2000.

One of the best sauces of raving anti-Semitism comin’ straight outta Australia is provided by Australian Protectionist Party member Martin Fletcher on his ‘Downunder Newslinks’ website. (In fairness to Fletcher, I should point out that on his site he includes vitriolic denunciations of Aborigines, Asians, Muslims, queers, and all the ‘usual suspects’ who occupy the far-right line-up.) Along with his support for the APP — he co-administers their online Forum with Darrin Hodges — Martin’s efforts on behalf of the 14 words — “We must secure the existence of our people and a future for White children” — are worthy of recognition. So too his provision of a copy of the Muslim Massacre videogame. Martin provides further hours of Yanqui infotainment on his ‘news’ site, including documentary videos on Barack Hussein O’Bama, Holocaust denial, David Duke, Stormfront and dead Nutzi Dr William Pierce (author of The Turner Diaries). Indeed, on Downunder Newslinks, The Turner Diaries, along with The Myth of the Six Million, The International Jew, Did Six Million Really Die? and The Protocols of Zion are all available to help White People interpret the Australian news.

Speaking of the sun-burnt country, Anti-Semitism exists as a cultural undercurrent, but not an especially popular one. Thus, while various forms of abuse and harassment continue to occur — one particular incident involving an angry man from Perth, WA drew some media attention recently — it does not form the important political principle it does on other islands, nor does it constitute an idea or practice with sufficient social weight to propel political careers forward; quite the opposite, in fact. As such, principal political scapegoats are kindly provided by the Muslim menace. (Oh. And The Blacks. Of course.)

Choice Anti-Semitism quote: ‘MY favourite definition of an anti-Semite is “a person who hates Jews more than is absolutely necessary”.’ (Some of my best friends [are] anti-Semitic, Barry Cohen, The Australian, May 21, 2008.)


‘Zionism’, like ‘Anti-Semitism’, may trace its roots back many centuries, but only really became solidified as an ideology and as a movement in the late 1800s, in particular by way of Theodor (Binyamin Ze’ev) Herzl (1860–1904). Like Uncle Ziggy, Herzl confronted Anti-Semitism during the course of his studies at the University of Vienna — unlike Freud, Herzl sought to confront it politically, most famously in his book Der Judenstaat (The Jewish State), published in February 1896. (Note that Freud did join the lodge “Wien” of B’nai B’rith in 1897; he also responded to Nazi Anti-Semitism by proclaiming his Jewish identity even more strongly. Further disco on Freud’s Jewish identity is contained in the final chapter, ‘To Die In Freedom’, of Peter Gay’s biography, Freud: A Life For Our Time, Papermac, 1995 (1988). He certainly had a grim sense of humour: Just before 82-year-old Sigmund Freud was allowed to leave German-occupied Austria in 1938, the SS insisted he sign a statement claiming he had been treated well. He complied with a flourish: “I can most highly recommend the Gestapo to everyone.”)

Of course, the realisation of the idea of a Jewish nation-state in/as Israel in 1948 has been considered a triumph for some, and a disaster for others. Like other Big Ideas — Australia, Christianity, Fascism, Germany, Islam, Marxism, Nationalism, and so on — nearly two thousand years after a Jewish carpenter got nailed to a tree for saying how great it would be to be nice to people for a change, Zionism has a long and complex history (one antagonistic account is Ralph Schoenman’s The Hidden History of Zionism, 1988) and so too ‘Anti-Zionism’. An examination of the relationship between Anti-Semitism and Anti-Zionism — one of many — is available by way of Robert S. Wistrich’s essay ‘Anti-Zionism and Anti-Semitism’ (Jewish Political Studies Review, Vol.16, Nos.3/4, Fall 2004). Wistrich argues that “anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism are two distinct ideologies that over time (especially since 1948) have tended to converge, generally without undergoing a full merger”; the strong link between the two is one of the principal criticisms of the Anti-German camp (for further elucidation, see : ‘Communism, anti-German criticism and Israel’, An interview with Stephan Grigat by Jens Misera. First published in Israel Nachrichten, the German daily newspaper in Tel Aviv in 2004; first published in English at in 2005.)

The beardy bloke presiding over the meeting is Herr Herzl.

Of contemporary ‘Anti-Zionism’, Jacques Hersh offers some Inconvenient Truths about ‘Real Existing’ Zionism in the Monthly Review (May 2009, Vol.61, No.1); further supplemented by Daniel Lang/Levitsky’s thoughts on how Jews Confront Zionism (June 2009, Vol.61, No.2). Probably the most well-known Australian Jewish critic of Zionism is Antony Loewenstein.

Choice Anti-Zionism quote: “Anti-Zionism has become so widespread and “politically correct” and it is so extreme and so divorced from political and historic reality that one suspects that it masks even more dangerous and more ancient hatreds.” Bill Anderson, The Age, June 20, 2009.

…and Anarchism

The Free Voice of Labor: The Jewish Anarchists is the title of a kick-arse 1980 doco by Steve Fischler and Joel Sucher of Pacific Street Films (also available from AK Press, which re-released the film, along with Anarchism in America, in 2006):

See also : Albert Meltzer: The Fascist Objection to Anarchism (January 6, 2006) | Israel, Jews, the state, anarchism… (May 22, 2008) | Black Flag: Bulletin of the Anarchist Black Cross (April 14, 2009) | ‘Co-opting the Counter Culture: Troy Southgate and the National Revolutionary Faction’ by Graham D. Macklin (May 30, 2009) | Messianic Troublemakers: The Past and Present Jewish Anarchism, Jesse Cohn, Zeek, April 30, 2005 | Dolgoff, Sam, 1902-1990 | The Rudolf Rocker Cultural Centre.


A “Literary Political Salon”

It is evident that Chomsky’s passion for libertarian anarchism and political debate could not be accommodated by the school system. So, curious and free spirited, he began, at the age of thirteen, to travel alone by train to New York City. There he visited relatives and haunted the secondhand bookstores on Fourth Avenue. In the course of these visits he picked up lots of books, which he devoured at home in Philadelphia. But he also spent many of his precious New York hours with an uncle (his mother’s sister’s husband) who ran a newsstand on Seventy-Second Street. He was a very bright, though little-educated man with a varied background. He taught Chomsky about Freud, and indeed, attracted by his grasp of Freud’s theories, people came to him for analysis. He had also been exposed to “Marxist sectarian politics ­ Stalinist, Trotskyite, non-Leninist sects of one sort or another” ­things about which Chomsky himself was just beginning to learn (Chomsky Reader 11). A hunchback, Chomsky’s uncle benefited from a program for people with physical disabilities. He was offered employment selling newspapers; however, given the unfavorable location of the stand, he did very little business. Instead, the stand became a lively “literary political salon” for Jewish professional and intellectual emigrés. Says Chomsky, “The Jewish working-class culture in New York was very unusual. It was highly intellectual, very poor; a lot of people had no jobs at all and others lived in slums and so on. But it was a rich and lively intellectual culture: Freud, Marx, the Budapest String Quartet, literature, and so forth. That was, I think, the most influential intellectual culture during my early teens” (Chomsky Reader 11). Chomsky’s uncle eventually went on to become a successful lay psychiatrist, but he made his most indelible mark upon his young nephew during this period of informal contact in New York.

Deeply influenced by what he was reading and by the discussions he was having with a host of new acquaintances, Chomsky was moving more and more in the direction of anarchism and away from Marxism. Otero notes that since a number of his relatives were on the fringes of the Communist Party, the young Chomsky did develop interests related to Marxism, “but by the time he was twelve or thirteen he had already `worked out of that phase'” (“Chomsky and the Libertarian Tradition” 4). So, during his visits to New York, Chomsky also frequented the office of Freie Arbeiter Stimme, an anarchist journal with notable contributors, such as Rudolf Rocker…

Chomsky was reading other anarchist material by, for example, Diego Abad de Santillán, who, a few months before the onset of the Spanish Civil War (in March of 1936), wrote a book that was partially translated and republished as After the Revolution. During this period Chomsky also read works by left Marxists (non-Bolshevik Marxists), including Karl Liebknecht, Rosa Luxemburg, and Karl Korsch. Korsch’s work was an important source of inspiration for some of the more theoretically oriented Marxist thinkers who, in turn, exerted various degrees of influence upon Chomsky. In fact, Chomsky claims that Korsch was a Spanish-anarchosyndicalist-movement sympathizer, suggesting that a broad camp of left-thinking individuals found much that was worthwhile in the Spanish anarchist actions: “Marxism also covers a pretty broad spectrum and there is a point at which some varieties of anarchism and some varieties of Marxism come very close together, as for example, people like Karl Korsch, who was very sympathetic to the Spanish anarchist movement, though he himself was sort of an orthodox Marxist” (Language and Politics 168).

[On Korsch, anarchism and Marxism, see also : Andrew Giles-Peters (January 22, 2009) | Anarchism & Marxism Part 666 (May 11, 2009).]

These orthodox Marxists were generally less important to Chomsky because of the extreme level of their commitment to Marxism and because he felt their analyses were overly complex. This is a point of contention for others who, though in pursuit of goals similar to Chomsky’s, nonetheless believe that the mechanisms and strategies of capitalism must be subjected to the kind of deeply philosophical and complex reflection that characterizes some Marxist analysis [–]­ for example, the works of Frankfurt School theorists. Chomsky comments: “The intellectuals around the Marxist tradition (Lukács, Frankfurt School, etc.) I read a bit but wasn’t much interested in, frankly. I don’t find that kind of work very illuminating, to tell the truth. The ideas that seem useful also seem pretty simple, and I don’t understand what all the verbiage is for” (8 Aug. 1994). His early attraction to anarchism and resistance to the Marxist tradition was eventually translated into a strong interest in local activist work and a rejection of overly complexified studies [of] class analysis, even though he did discover some crucial overlaps between the two…

About @ndy

I live in Melbourne, Australia. I like anarchy. I don't like nazis. I enjoy eating pizza and drinking beer. I barrack for the greatest football team on Earth: Collingwood Magpies. The 2024 premiership's a cakewalk for the good old Collingwood.
This entry was posted in !nataS, Anti-fascism, History, Media, State / Politics, Trot Guide, War on Terror and tagged , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

12 Responses to Anti-Fascism, Anti-German, Anti-Semitism, Anti-Zionism…

  1. Lumpen says:

    Nice post, old chap.

  2. THR says:

    Agreed, nice post. The problem is you put too much in it. If you only stuck to two-sentence posts a la Tim Blair, it would be easier for commenters to arrive and write ‘First!’ and ‘Second!’ or whatever, depending on their respective orders of commenting.

    On anti-semitism – do you see the undercurrent of Islamophobia around today as analogous to the anti-semitism of old? I’m thinking in particular of a number of ‘conservative’ or ‘classic liberal’ websites that purport to be ‘watching’ Islam and jihad et al. I can’t remember the Arabic word, but they make the claim that even ‘assimilated’ Muslims in places like Australia, who are largely indistinguishable from anybody else, are actually secretly plotting on behalf of their faith.

    On Zionism – I’m coming to think its importance is overstated. Sorry to blogwhore, but I put it like this elsewhere:

    I wonder if Zionism is to the ruling Israeli elite what German Romanticism was to the Nazis – a necessary, but hardly sufficient condition.

    My point here is not to equate Israel with the Nazis, but rather to suggest that all the ideological posturing is secondary to the Realpolitik.

    The early history of Chomsky is very interesting. He himself has alluded to his intellectual history, but I’d never seen the detail before.

  3. vents says:

    you forgot Trotsky

  4. Sophia says:

    Whilst not Jewish, I’m definitely of the opinion that a lot of this “anti-zionist” stuff is little more than thinly veiled anti-semitism. The war crimes and even genocide committed by Israel is nothing short of horrific, but blindly promoting authoritarian nationalist groups as solutions sits poorly with me — from an anarchist pov I think both sides are just as stupid, and it’s always shocking to me to see people demonizing Israel (more to the point “The Jews”) and claiming that Israel is little more than a colonialist settler-state without acknowledging that the situation is so much more complicated than that. From personal experience, many of those promoting the rights of Palestinians are more concerned with trying to shuffle people signing their petitions into joining their political parties, and want nothing to do with any person of Jewish descent wanting to be involved in case it alienates others involved. That, to me, is more than a little dodgy.

    As an aside, what do you think of the kibbutzim in Israel?

  5. @ndy says:


    Um… the kibbutzim were an interesting experiment in cooperative labour — in contemporary Israel, they have largely been eclipsed by ‘commercial’ imperatives, and I seem to remember reading only fairly recently that some of the last hold-outs are going under/voluntarily dissolving themselves. They have an interesting history too, a product of the political ferment of an earlier (pre-1948) era. Uncle Noam:

    QUESTION: What was your college experience like?

    CHOMSKY: I was probably lucky in that respect. I never really went to college. I did finally get a Ph.D, and I did go through the first two years of college, but after that I [did not really attend college in the normal manner].

    I attended the University of Pennsylvania, living at home, of course, which meant several hours commuting, and working, mainly teaching Hebrew school afternoons and Sunday, sometimes evenings as well. There was no thought in those days of attending college in any other way in our circles, and no financial means to do so. The first two years of college were pretty much an extension of high school, except in one respect. I entered with a good deal of enthusiasm and expectations that all sorts of fascinating prospects would open up, but these did not survive long, except in a few cases — an exciting freshman course with C. West Churchman in philosophy, for example, and courses in Arabic that I took and became quite immersed in, in part out of political interests, in part out of an interest in Semitic linguistics that derives from my father’s work in that area, and in part through the influence of Giorgio Levi Della Vida, an antifascist exile from Italy who was a marvelous person as well as an outstanding scholar. At the end of two years, I was planning to drop out to pursue my own interests, which were then largely political. This was 1947, and I had just turned eighteen. I was deeply interested, as I had been for some years, in radical politics with an anarchist or left-wing (anti-Leninist) Marxist flavor, and even more deeply involved in Zionist affairs and activities — or what was then called “Zionist,” though the same ideas and concerns are now called “anti-Zionist.” I was interested in socialist, binationalist options for Palestine, and in the kibbutzim and the whole cooperative labor system that had developed in the Jewish settlement there (the Yishuv), but had never been able to become close to Zionist youth groups that shared these interests because they were either Stalinist or Trotskyite and I always been strongly anti-Bolshevik. We should bear in mind that in the latter stages of the Depression, when I was growing up, these were very lively issues.

    I intended to drop out of college and to pursue these interests. The vague ideas I had at the time were to go to Palestine, perhaps to to a kibbutz, to try to become involved in efforts at Arab-Jewish cooperation within a socialist framework, opposed to the deeply antidemocratic concept of a Jewish state (a position that was considered well within the mainstream of Zionism). Through these interests, I happened to meet Zellig Harris, a really extraordinary person who had a great influence on many young people in those days. He had a coherent understanding of this whole range of issues, which I lacked, and I was immensely attracted by it, and by him personally as well, also by others who I met through him. He happened to be one of the leading figures in modern linguistics, teaching at the University of Pennsylvania. His interests were very broad, linguistics being only a small corner of them, and he was a person of unusual brilliance and originality. I began to take his graduate courses; in fact the first reading I did in linguistics was the proofs of his book Methods in Structural Linguistics, which appeared several years later. At his suggestion, I also began to take graduate courses in philosophy — with Nelson Goodman, Morton White, and others — and mathematics — with Nathan Fine — fields in which I had no background at all, but which I found fascinating, in part, no doubt, thanks to unusually stimulating teachers. I suppose Harris had it in my mind to influence me to return to college, though I don’t recall talking about it, particularly, and it all seemed to happen without much planning.

    Anyway, it worked, but I had a highly unconventional college experience. The linguistics department consisted of a small number of graduate students, and in Harris’ close circle, a very small group that shared political and other interests apart from linguistics, and was quite alienated from the general college atmosphere. In fact, our “classes” were generally held in the Horn & Hardart restaurant across the street or in Harris’ apartment in Princeton or New York, all-day sessions that ranged widely over quite a variety of topics and were intellectually exciting as well as personally very meaningful experiences. I had almost no contact with the university, apart from these connections. I was by then very deeply immersed in linguistics, philosophy, and logic, and received (highly unconventional) B.A. and M.A. degrees…

    QUESTION: Was it after college that you went to live on a kibbutz in Israel?

    CHOMSKY: I went for a few months when I was at the Society of Fellows, in 1953. The kibbutz where we lived, which was about twenty years old, was then very poor. There was very little food, and work was hard. But I liked it very much in many ways. Abstracting it from context, this was a functioning and very successful libertarian community, so I felt. And I felt it would be possible to find some mixture of intellectual and physical work.

    I came close to returning there to live, as my wife very much wanted to do at the time. I had nothing particularly attractive here. I didn’t expect to be able to have an academic career, and was not particularly interested in one. There was no major drive to stay. On the other hand, I did have a lot of interest in the kibbutz and I liked it very much when I was there. But there were things I didn’t like, too. In particular, the ideological conformity was appalling. I don’t know if I could have survived long in that environment because I was very strongly opposed to the Leninist ideology, as well as the general conformism, and uneasy — less so than I should have been — about the exclusiveness and the racist institutional setting.

    What I did not then face honestly was the fairly obvious fact that these are Jewish institutions and are so because of legal and administrative structures and practice. So, for example, I doubt if there’s an Arab in any kibbutz, and there hardly could be, because of the land laws and the role the institution plays in the Israeli system. In fact, even the Oriental Jews, some of whom were marginally at the kibbutz or in the immigrant town nearby, were treated rather shabbily, with a good deal of contempt and fear. I also visited some Arab villages, and learned some unpleasant things, which I’ve never seen in print, about the military administration to which Arab citizens were subjected.

    Now I had some fairly strong feelings about all of that at the time. In fact, as I mentioned, I was very strongly opposed to the idea of a Jewish state back in 1947-48. I felt sure that the socialist institutions of the Yishuv — the pre-state Jewish settlement in Palestine — would not survive the state system, as they would become integrated into a sort of state management and that would destroy the aspects of the Yishuv that I found most attractive.

    But, if we abstract away from those factors, the external environment, it was a kind of anarchist community.

    QUESTION: What did you do on the kibbutz? Did you find the intellectual life stimulating? And why did you leave?

    CHOMSKY: Remember that I was only there for about six weeks. I was completely unskilled, so I was doing only unskilled agricultural work, under the guidance of kibbutz members. I actually enjoyed the work very much, though for how long I would have, I don’t know. As for intellectual life, this kibbutz was Buberite in origin, mainly German Jews who were quite well-educated though one of the people I came to know best was a Christian immigrant who had left a large farm he owned in Rhodesia out of hatred for the racist society there, and who was really a first-class agronomist with many interesting ideas. There were very interesting people there, but it was surreal in some ways. This was 1953, at the time of the Slansky trials in Czechoslovakia and the last stages of Stalinist lunacy. These late Stalin purges had a strong anti-Semitic element, but people there actually defended them. They even defended the trial of a fellow kibbutz member who was an emissary of the kibbutz movement there and was charged with being a spy, which they knew to be false. Not all did, of course. Those who thought about these things — many did not — were orthodox Marxist-Leninists, and I could discern no visible departure from a fairly rigid party line, though there may well have been much that I never saw.

    It was a short visit, and I returned to Harvard, planning to come back, maybe to stay, in a few years. My term at the Society of Fellows was supposed to end in 1954, but I had no job prospects and asked for a year’s extension, which I received. My wife, meanwhile, went back to the kibbutz for a longer visit. We planned then to return to stay, but by then I had obtained a research position at MIT and was very much involved in my own linguistic work. For one reason or another, without any particular conscious decision at any point, we never did return.

    ~ ‘Personal influences’, Noam Chomsky, Excerpted from The Chomsky Reader, 1983.

    As for the petition business: yes, the various Trotskyist groupuscules that exist on the student left often use these as a segue (or an attempted segue) into participation in their parties — this is not new. I’m a little surprised, however, to hear that this would be accompanied by an aversion to having Jewish recruits. Certainly, the Marxist tradition of which they form a segment contained (and still contains) many prominent Jewish voices; in the greasy hands of anti-Semites, this is read as evidence that ‘Marxism’ — and ‘Bolshevism’ or ‘Communism’ in particular — was a Jewish plot. I’m also unsure to what extent it’s actually the case that ‘many’ who involve themselves in what I suppose would be most appropriate to term ‘Palestinian solidarity’ have recourse to such methods or such aversions. For what it’s worth (which I don’t think is much), the accusation of anti-Semitism has been thrown at ‘Socialist Alternative’ on a number of occasions: most recently by Nick Dyrenfurth (see : Socialist Alternative: socialist jihadists of the far Left subsisting on a diet of anti-Semitism, lentils and tofu) and prior to that as a result of some argy bargy between SAlt and some Zionist students (see : Anti-Semitism on campus?).

    From this anarchist’s point of view, I reckon Fredy Perlman (‘The Continuing Appeal of Nationalism’), Rudolf Rocker (Nationalism and Culture) and Benedict Anderson (Imagined Communities) are most germane. The Nationalism Project is also neat-o.

    Finally, yeah, Israel is ‘complicated’; but then, what isn’t?


    Link, noted.

    “On anti-semitism – do you see the undercurrent of Islamophobia around today as analogous to the anti-semitism of old?”

    There are certainly parallels that may be drawn, but I also think that ‘xenophobia’ takes many forms, and may well be indispensable to the nation (and state) building project. (‘The Anarchist’ as ‘Foreign Scum’ has a similarly impeccable heritage.) I dunno to what extent classical liberalism is at fault (not that you’re making this argument either), as it appears to me that many (if not all) cases of ‘jihad-watching’ emanating from online sources are badly contaminated by simple bigotry. In this sense, perhaps, there has been a partial re-alignment of political forces (on the ‘right’), somewhat akin to what some critics of ‘anti-Zionism’ allege has been occurring on the left. I’m also unsure that — at least in Australia — ‘Islamophobia’ is an undercurrent, as at times it seems to approach constituting itself as a popular wave (and as we all know Australians are very keen surfers). Beyond this, I think that the rupture lies along the lines demarcated by folks such as Bernard Lewis and Samuel Huntington; that is, ‘The Clash of Civilizations’ thesis. Which is bunkum, but still. And yeah: like The Jew, the loyalty of The Muslim to the law and to the state is always subject to questioning — the term often used to describe how Muslims are empowered to lie to Unbelievers is ‘taqiyya’.

    LIZ JACKSON: James Woolsey was in a meeting advising the Navy as the hijacked planes were flying to Washington.

    JAMES WOOLSEY, CIA DIRECTOR 1993-1995: As I was walking out of it, we were about two miles south of the Pentagon. Heard a huge crash, and that was almost certainly the plane flying into the Pentagon. It seemed very likely that it was al-Qaeda or somebody like al-Qaeda because of the attacks on the ‘Cole’ and the East African American embassies. And that was confirmed relatively quickly.

    LIZ JACKSON: What was your view about why?

    JAMES WOOLSEY, CIA DIRECTOR 1993-1995: Well, I think, for all of us, whether it’s the British with the 7/7 bombings, or Australia with the Bali bombings, what’s important is to understand that we’re not being attacked for what we’ve done. We’re being attacked for who we are. We’re representatives of the world’s democracies. Three that are willing to fight for that more than many others – indeed, both World War I and World War II and the Cold War had very substantial participation from all three of us. And democracy and the rule of law stand squarely in the way of these theocratic, genocidal Islamist fanatics. They have to come after us for the same reason Hitler did or the Japanese Empire. It’s…we stand in the way.

    So, I think that’s the heart of the matter. It’s not any one specific thing that any of us has done.

    LIZ JACKSON: When you say it’s not what we’ve done, but who we are, people who’ve been involved in those missions and have made suicide videos do point to specific policies. They say it’s about Israel/Palestine, they say it’s about the war in Iraq.

    TERRORIST VIDEOTAPE: Until you pull all your troops out of Afghanistan and Iraq. Until you stop all financial and military support to the US in Israel…

    LIZ JACKSON: Do you just not believe them?

    JAMES WOOLSEY, CIA DIRECTOR 1993-1995: Well, there’s a concept called Taqiyya, which means lying to infidels is fine. And they’re lying.

  6. @ndy says:

    Israel defies US on settlements
    Jason Koutsoukis, Jerusalem
    The Age
    June 30, 2009

    A PROPOSAL by Israeli Defence Minister Ehud Barak to freeze Jewish settlement construction in the occupied West Bank for six months was overshadowed last night by the announcement that another 50 settlement units had just been approved…

  7. Thanks for the mention Andy. Lots in this post to get one’s teeth into, and an interesting discussion thread.

    On antisemitism/Islamophobia: there are certainly parallels and relationships, but also contrasts. See for some interesting stuff.

  8. Jamie-R says:

    Gary Ablett Snr, @ndy, he’s my dawg! Called God like Elvis, didn’t like it, like Elvis, for the muscleheads up north, F*** RUGBY, GO TO FRANCE. There, that should tame them. As for GARY ABLETT OMG OMG OMG!!!!,21985,24701709-2862,00.html

    In particular:

    …much of Western society has embraced the theory of evolution as a fact, which tells our young people they are nothing more than cosmic orphans, with no real purpose, value or destiny — void of hope for a greater future — and then wonder why they adopt the attitude, “Lets eat, drink and be merry, for tomorrow we die”.

    Sir Winston Churchill warned: “This leaves that generation without a sense of definition or direction, making them the fulfilment of Karl Marx’s dictum. A people without a heritage are easily persuaded.”

    Only his son is better in this game, for all time.

  9. Pingback: Two interesting people « Poumista

  10. Pingback: Anarchists Against the Wall Speaking Tour (And Moar), March 2012 | slackbastard

  11. Pingback: A reply to Paul Sakkal (The Age) on Nasser Mashni (Australian Palestinian Advocacy Network) & 3CR | slackbastard

Leave a Reply

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.