Wednesday, February 8, 2012

Fighting Back With Historical Facts

[By Gil Troy. H/T Twitter.]

As some universities brace for the annual spring round of anti-Israel weeks, which falsely accuse Israel of the great crimes committed by South African apartheid racists, we must put this absurdity in historical perspective. For starters, the conflict between Israelis and Palestinians is a national one, not a racial one. The false comparison between what happens in the Middle East today with what non-whites experienced under South Africa’s apartheid regime, dishonours the suffering blacks in South Africa endured. Anyone who perpetuates the big lie accusing Israel of practising apartheid or claiming that Zionism is racism is simply passing on Soviet propaganda that has outlived its maker. In that spirit, let’s contemplate the African-American community’s response in 1975 to the United Nations General Assembly resolution claiming that Zionism is racism.
The day after the resolution passed, on Nov. 11, 1975, the Conference of Presidents of Major Jewish Organizations, the umbrella group of 32 leading American Jewish organizations, organized a noontime “rally against racism and antisemitism” in Manhattan. Many blacks attended the rally, and three important African-American leaders spoke: Percy Sutton, a famous lawyer and politician; Clarence Mitchell, a veteran NAACP official, and the activist Bayard Rustin. Many in the black civil rights community resented the Arabs hijacking their language and sloppily misapplying it to the Middle East.
“Smearing the ‘racist’ label on Zionism is an insult to intelligence,” wrote Vernon Jordan, the then-40-year-old president of the National Urban League. “Black people, who recognize code words since we’ve been victimized by code words like ‘forced busing,’ ‘law and order,’ and others, can easily smell out the fact that ‘Zionism’ in this context is a code word for antisemitism.” Jordan, a Southern-born lawyer, based his case against the General Assembly for “saying that national self-determination is for everyone except Jews.” And he detailed Arab discrimination against Christian Copts, Kurds, Sudanese blacks and Jews – especially dark-skinned Sephardi Jews.
One African-American speaker in particular, Bayard Rustin, stole the show. Born in 1912, a Communist during the Great Depression, a pacifist and draft resister during World War II, a gay activist long before it was safe to be one, and a labour union organizer, Rustin coached his friend, Martin Luther King, Jr., in Mahatma Gandhi’s ethos of non-violence. Rustin believed in “social dislocation and creative trouble.” Nicknamed “Mr. March,” Rustin helped organize the 1963 March on Washington for Jobs and Freedom, meeting Daniel Patrick Moynihan shortly thereafter on the civil rights circuit. Rustin worked closely with Jews, championing Israel as a democratic sentry surrounded by Middle East dictatorships. Rustin knew how much Jews wanted black support for Zionism in refuting the UN’s racism charge, and he happily provided it.
Rustin considered the resolution “an insult to the generations of blacks who have struggled against real racism.” In his newspaper column, he described the “incalculable damage” done to the fight against racism when the word becomes a “political weapon” rather than a moral standard. Rooting anti-Zionism in the ugly intersection between traditional antisemitism and the Arab desire to eradicate Israel, Rustin quoted Rev. King, a strong supporter of Israel, who said:  “when people criticize Zionists, they mean Jews, you are talking antisemitism.”
Rustin and others also feared distraction from the anti-apartheid fight. Before the vote, 28 African-American intellectuals appealed to the General Assembly to bury this “extraneous issue.” The scholars warned that a taint of antisemitism around the broader mission “will heavily compromise African hopes of expunging apartheid from the world.”
Given his roots in the labour movement, Rustin resented the Arabs’ hypocrisy, considering their traditional contempt for black labourers. At the rally, Rustin noted Arabs’ historic involvement in the African slave trade. “Shame on them!” he shouted.  “[They] are the same people who enslaved my people.”
Tall and handsome, with his Afro sticking up and looming over his high forehead, Rustin ended his speech by bursting into song, singing Go Down Moses. As thousands of New Yorkers, black and white, Jewish and non-Jewish, joined in shouting “Let my people go,” the black and Jewish experiences reached a harmonic convergence.
We need to learn our history. We need to learn the facts. We need to fight the apartheid libel with the truth.
And we need to challenge Palestinians to devote a week to celebrating their own nationalism rather than focusing on destroying Israel and denigrating Zionism.

8 comments:

  1. "And we need to challenge Palestinians to devote a week to celebrating their own nationalism rather than focusing on destroying Israel and denigrating Zionism."

    Unfortunately that presumes that they HAVE nationalism to celebrate that isn't coincident with destroying Israel -- and that isn't the case.

    ReplyDelete
  2. I agree with Stevie. The only purpose behind Palestinian nationalism is the destruction of the State of Israel. Otherwise, why wouldn't the Palestinian leaders have accepted any of the 3 latest state offers? And why wouldn't the Palestinian people put pressure on their leaders to do away with the hate mongering? For HuffPo to cater to these cretins shows exactly what HuffPo is about: faux journalism with a whacked sense of integrity.

    ReplyDelete
  3. Israel is guilty of the same type of crimes as south africa
    You are an apartheid

    what you are offering here are excuses for why you have chosen the path of apartheid.
    and not surprisingly your excuses are the same as theirs. You equate their population as bloodthirsty savages who can not live in a modern society

    ReplyDelete
  4. Quentin Baggg 0/30.
    Oh, and if you want to be taken seriously about the discussion you started, try learning what apartheid really was and why it doesn't apply to your argument.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Anonymous.

    First of all, as long as the Palestinians insist on behaving 'like blood thirsty savages who can not live in a modern society', they will continue to be equated as such.
    Who else uses their own children, flesh and blood, for the sole purpose of blowing themselves up in order to kill Jews? Who else celebrates as five family members are slaughtered by the slitting of their throats, including a tiny baby only months old? Who does not stand up and condemn the intentionally firing of missiles at a childrens schoolbus, or the bombing of public buses, playgrounds and restaurants and social events?
    Not only do they not condemn these actions, they are proud of them and vow to continue.
    So you say, 'bloodthirsty'? Yes. 'savages'. Yes.

    As for 'apartheid', the mere use of that word in regard to Israel is absolute, pure, ignorance.
    It is nothing other than a dramatic word to be used for propaganda purposes.

    For cryin' out loud, if you're gonna attempt to make an argument, at least be honest,
    without honesty, you will never be taken seriously. You are just another propagandist.

    ReplyDelete
  6. re annonomous

    I am glad to see at least one israel supporter not denying the obvious.
    israel is an apartheid.

    There is no debate there. What is left is the excuses for why you are an apartheid.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Let me get this straight here: you read one of the 5 comments that declares Israel is an apartheid state, ignore the fact that the reason "there is no debate there" is because the other 4 comments demolished Quentin Baggg's argument...and you're saying QB IS AN ISRAEL SUPPORTER???
      Please tell me you're committed to the Palestinian PR cause and plan to stay there for the rest of your life! That would make my year, seriously.

      Delete
    2. @Anonymous who states: "I am glad to see at least one israel supporter not denying the obvious. israel is an apartheid."

      How can one deny something that doesn't exist to begin with?
      There is no apartheid being practiced by Israel. None.
      If anyone is guilty of "apartheid", it would be the Arabs, largely the Arabs of Gaza,
      where the negotiation or sale of a home or land to a Jew is considered treason, and punishable by death.

      While Israel's population is more than 20% Arab, please tell us all again, exactly how many Jews live in and enjoy freedom in Gaza?

      Your propaganda is showing!

      Delete

Hey guys we've started to employ a slight comment policy. We used to have completely open comments but then people abused it. So our comment policy is such: No obvious trolling or spamming. And be warned: unlike the Huffington Post we actually enforce our comment policy.