#Quasi-jewish

[bijoumikhawal]

reading a book about Magdalene pilgrimages in France and its immediately. Ah I forgot how annoying white spiritualists are and how frustrating Christian centric spiritual frameworks can be

like out the gate the author acknowledges a lot of the people she's talking about believe in pseudo science and are subtly racist towards Indigenous peoples, especially of the Americas, but she points out the pseudo science in a way that still comes off as a bit unfair to the groups she's citing

But there's also something so funny about "there are conversations about the increasing secularization of pilgrimages because you can't tell the catholics apart from the quasi-pagans anymore", from a MENA studies perspective. A lot of holy sites in the MENA are "secular" in that multiple religious groups historically have used them (this has been negatively impacted by colonialism, salafism, etc, but it was the norm for hundreds of years before that). The idea that it's abnormal for multiple faiths to use the same site is odd to me

[raayllum]

4x05 / 4x09

[rotzaprachim]

information i didn't know i needed (both ben barnes and diego luna were on the list of possible aro's in twilight new moon)

[starry-bi-sky]

Broke: danny runs away from bruce wayne because he reminds him of Vlad (bad, overused, fundamentally misunderstands Bruce’s character as a whole for a shit joke)

Woke: bruce wayne doesnt remind danny of vlad masters, but of his best friend sam manson

black hair? check ✅

jewish? check ✅

richer than god? check ✅

gothic? well, mister wayne isnt himself but he lives in the most gothic city on earth so quasi-check ✅

loudly and proudly an activist for various rights including environmental and womens' rights? check ✅

im tired of the "oh danny runs away from bruce because he's rich and reminds him of vlad" give me a danny who actually likes bruce because he reminds him of his awesome kickass best friend who is also stupidly rich

like i’ve been told about the whole “oh fruit loop joke” before and i still think its a cheap, shallow joke if i’ve ever heard one that flanderizes Bruce’s character to an impressive degree. Vlad and Bruce are only comparable in the same sense that they’re both rich and Bruce adopts kids — but he isn’t doing it because of the “adoption addiction” joke, he’s doing it because he sees himself in the kids he adopts and he wants to give them better than he did. Vlad wants Danny as his son to spite Jack, they are not remotely comparable beyond that.

Like, beyond that too i highly doubt vlad masters gives his employees benefits like bruce wayne does. who canonically hires reformed villains and has various branches of medical, industrial, technology, etc in his company in order to help the people of gotham. does Vlad Masters run charities, soup kitchens, etc?? is Vlad contributing to the community? No, no he isnt.

[probablyasocialecologist]

Just as the Arab is always involved in Jewish Israeli discourse, the tree is always uninvolved. What could be ‘involved’ about planting a tree? A tree is a tree is a tree. And trees are not only uninvolved, they are good. ‘Ecologists usually portray nature as a domain of intrinsic value’, writes geography and law scholar Irus Braverman in her book, Planted Flags: Trees, Land, and Law in Israel/Palestine. Trees are assumed to be natural, innocent ecological entities with no say in politics. But in this conflict, which is largely a conflict over land – with two national movements contesting the same territory – digging below the surface shows that trees have been used strategically to seize, hold and control territory. They are used as tools ‘almost as if they were weapons’, writes Shaul Ephraim Cohen in his book, The Politics of Planting.  It is in Israel’s interest for trees to appear uninvolved, resulting in a process that Braverman calls ‘naturalisation’, meaning the portrayal of ecological changes as ‘natural’ or otherwise inevitable, and the use of the innocence of nature to cloak an ethno-national agenda. Indeed, Braverman’s book was originally titled Tree Wars before her publisher asked for a more marketable title. The message is clear: trees are part of a ‘covert war’ that mobilises ecology to fix and create geopolitical facts in the region, largely through the actions of the KKL-JNF – Keren Kayemeth LeIsrael, or the Jewish National Fund. The Jerusalem Forest, where I myself planted a pine sapling at the age of six, is a creation of the KKL-JNF, which planted a greenbelt of parks in the Judaean Hills west of the city in the 1950s and 1960s. Later, after Israel captured East Jerusalem – and the entire West Bank – from Jordanian control and ‘reunified’ it in 1967, this forest was expanded eastwards, across the Green Line. Like two-thirds of the 400,000 acres of forests managed by the KKL-JNF, the Jerusalem Forest is not scientifically classified as a ‘natural forest’ like the native stands of Mediterranean oak, terebinth and carob in the wetter parts of northern Israel. It is a distinctly human creation, with large monocultural stands of Aleppo pine trees of the same age. Ecologically, these pines are considered a ‘pioneer species’: growing quickly, requiring little maintenance and colonising what is considered, in the Zionist imaginary, to be ‘barren’ land.  Colonisation is precisely the point of afforestation. The KKL-JNF is a Zionist and quasi-governmental agency that was founded in 1901 as the paramount institution for buying and holding land for Jewish settlement in what was then Ottoman Palestine. The organisation bought land from local Palestinian residents and then began foresting or farming the land to demonstrate their presence and provide protection from land alienation. Today the KKL-JNF is still the largest private landholder in the region, owning 13 per cent of Israeli territory. Braverman describes the KKL-JNF as Israel’s ‘land-laundering body’, as the state employs the agency’s non-governmental status to hold vast swathes of land for exclusively Jewish use without fear of being labelled discriminatory. While the KKL-JNF performs many quasi-governmental tasks such as building roads, dams and farms, it is best known today for its campaigns to rehabilitate ‘degraded’ forests and plant new ones. The KKL-JNF claims to have planted 250 million trees over the past 120 years. 

[...]

After 1948, when the State of Israel was founded and more than 750,000 Palestinians were forcibly expelled from their land, the KKL-JNF began planting forests over Palestinian villages to prevent their residents from returning. The KKL-JNF felt that trees were, in their words, ‘the best guards of the land … Walls and fences can be cut down. A tree says “we are here”’. After planting, tree law protected new forests from demolition. This legal aspect was critical for afforestation’s success in capturing, occupying and controlling the land. It is part of what Braverman terms the ‘lawfare’ of the state, meaning an imperialist’s use of their own rules to impose a regime, which is then legitimised by its own legal structure. Israeli courts have determined that when a forest is grown on expropriated land, Palestinians who return to that land are trespassing. In 2010, the Supreme Court rejected a petition by Palestinian refugees from the village of al-Lajjun to reclaim land in the Megiddo forest, ruling that afforestation justified Israeli control under the 1953 Land Acquisition Law. As both Cohen and Braverman note then, short of human inhabitation, trees were considered the most effective tool to hold and control land for the Jewish state. What this meant, in practice, was that if there weren’t enough Jews to settle the land, the state used trees instead – as stand-ins for Jewish bodies.  The flip side of Israel controlling land through Jewish tree presence is expropriating Palestinian land through absence. Nowhere is this clearer than in the paradoxical legal status of the so-called ‘present absentees’, Palestinians who were internally displaced after the 1948 war. Under Israeli law, they lost their land deeds because they failed to prove ownership with a physical presence, even though many were driven from that land by violence. Israeli laws governing ‘Absentees’ Property’ have expropriated a startling 70 per cent of Israeli territory within the Green Line. Palestinian ‘absence’ was sloganised long before 1948 in the Zionist saying, ‘A land without a people for a people without a land’, which epitomises a deep failure and unwillingness to recognise native Palestinian inhabitation.

19 October 2021

[beguines]

Landscape helps capture the forms in which nations and movements literally and figuratively 'construct' or 'produce' nature, engineering its appearance and infusing it with significations—rendering landscape a 'cultural practice' rather than a given fact. Here landscape is both an object of investigation and a site of intervention; the very medium within which power and resistance are represented and conducted. Put differently, landscape is far from a neutral backdrop but is rather activated, serving as the medium of violence. Dispossession, deforestation, planting, land-grabbing, and acquisitions, privatization, re-modeling, clearance, or the destruction of infrastructures of life, including food sources, buildings, or supplies, all mobilize the landscape in their domination.

Representations of Middle Eastern and North African landscapes nearly invariably include desolate scenes of endless empty and parched deserts, decorated perhaps with an isolated string of camels, or a beach with large mounds of golden sand, a minaret, or an oil tower in the background. The temporality and general impression of these landscapes is slow, hazy, and dizzying, as if they are waiting for 'activation' by someone or something outside of it. Whether reproduced in academic scholarship, literature, film, tourist advertisements, or news media, these imagined colonial representations of the region's landscape place the environment centrally within them, projecting an understanding of the Middle East and North Africa as marginal, on the edge of ecological viability or as a degraded landscape facing imminent disaster due to human inaction. With this, an environmental imaginary enabled storytelling that pushed forward imperial interests in the name of 'development' and, later, of environmental 'sustainability' and 'protection.' In the case of the constructed 'Middle East,' as Diana K. Davis explains,

"Deforestation narratives have been particularly strong in the Levant region since the nineteenth century, where some of the most emotional accounts of forest destruction have hinged on the presumed widespread destruction of the Lebanese cedar forests illustrated in the cover image by Louis-François Cassas. Similar narratives of overgrazing and desertification were used during the British Mandate in Palestine to justify forestry policies as well as laws aimed at controlling nomads, such as the 1942 Bedouin control ordinance, in the name of curbing overgrazing. Such environmental imaginaries, once constructed, can be extremely tenacious and have surprisingly widespread effects."

In Palestine, the construction of an 'Israeli landscape' to redeem the purported damage done to the land by its indigenous population commenced with the first Zionist settlers in the nineteenth century and intensified with the establishment of the State of Israel in 1948. Reflected in former Prime Minister David Ben Gurion's 1951 public address to the newly formed Israeli Knesset (Parliament):

"We must wrap all the mountains of the country and their slopes in trees, all the hills and stony lands that will not succeed in agriculture, the dunes of the coastal valley, the dry lands of the Negev to the east and south of Baer Sheva, that is to say all of the land of Edom and the Arava until Eilat. We must also plant for security reasons, along all the borders, along all the roads, routes, and paths, around public and military buildings and facilities [ . . . ] We will not be faithful to one of the two central goals of the state—making the wilderness bloom—if we make do with only the needs of the hour [ . . . ] We are a state at the beginning of repairing the corruption of generations, corruption which was done to the nation and corruption which was done to the land."

This 'Israeli landscape' was largely cultivated through the multifaceted and by now well-documented eco-colonial practices of the quasi-governmental Israeli organization, Keren Kayemet L'Yisrael, the Jewish National Fund (JNF), which has since made striking efforts to position Israel as an environmental pioneer. Established in 1901, the JNF may very well be the first transnational environmental nationalist NGO, seeking to 'make the desert bloom' by planting forests, natural reserves, and recreational parks over the ruins of Palestinian villages, holy places, and historical sites. Distinguishing itself from other transnational Zionist organizations, such as the World Zionist Organization and the Jewish Agency, the JNF has since its inception portrayed itself as an environment-oriented nationalist organization, supporting the 'redemption' and 'reclamation' of the land through colonial policies presented in the language of preservation, maintenance, protection, and development of vital ecosystems and ecologically sound environments. Indeed, its public-facing promotional materials boast proudly that "Israel is the only country in the world that entered the twenty-first century with a net gain in the number of trees"—without context, of course, of the ways in which trees and the 'greened' landscape in the country are mobilized as weapons of erasure as part of a colonial imaginary that naturalizes non-Palestinian presence.

Shourideh C. Molavi, Environmental Warfare in Gaza: Colonial Violence and New Landscapes of Resistance

[punkeropercyjackson]

Deadass nobody who thinks Clark Kent is boring has ever actually consumed Superman media.The nigga is literally a jewish alien who was raised by farmers and has a goofy midwestern gentleman personality as a result and is a reporter and a secret superhero that's quasi-god level powerful but what REALLY makes him a hero is how human he is and he was the first ever Super AND THIS WAS HIS DEBUT

Compared to him,Batman's moneyedgecase and dysfunctional ass parenting Y*ung J*stice Animated emulated from him onto Supes when in the comics he's Dad personified puts me to sleep.I think 'i wish Clark Kent was my dad' at least twice every day

[mariacallous]

“Did Israel Avert a Hamas Massacre?” That was the question posed by the headline of a Vanity Fair exposé published in October 2014. The investigative report laid out a sophisticated plot by the Islamist terror group to kill and kidnap Israelis on the Gaza border. The plan: to use underground tunnels to infiltrate nearby civilian enclaves on Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish new year, when the communities would be at their most vulnerable. As one intelligence source put it, the operation had two goals: “First, get in and massacre people in a village. Pull off something they could show on television. Second, the ability to kidnap soldiers and civilians using the tunnels would give them a great bargaining chip.” The Israel Defense Forces subsequently confirmed this reporting to other media outlets, but not the specific date.

The tunnels were real. But at the time the massacre-that-wasn’t received little additional media coverage. It seemed too cinematic and convenient. Maybe it was a Hamas pipe dream that was never operational. Or maybe it was a worst-case scenario concocted by the Israeli security services and leaked to the media to justify their own ever-expanding countermeasures. Years passed without a mass border incursion, the tunnels were gradually detected and blocked, and I came to the conclusion that the skeptics were right about the plot being too lurid even for Hamas.

I was wrong. Last week, Hamas executed something quite like the attack on the Gaza border that it had planned all those years ago. Instead of tunneling underground on Rosh Hashanah, it invaded aboveground on another Jewish holiday, Simchat Torah. Some 1,500 terrorists stormed nearby civilian communities by land, air, and sea. They murdered babies in their cribs, parents in front of their children, and children in front of their parents. They burned entire families alive. They decapitated and mutilated their victims. They wore body cameras and documented their destruction as though it were a video game. They executed a grandmother in her home and uploaded the snuff film to her Facebook page. They deliberately targeted elementary schools. They kidnapped toddlers and a Holocaust survivor. They paraded a battered, naked woman through the streets of Gaza like a trophy. All told, they murdered more than 1,300 Israelis, almost all civilians, and abducted some 150 others, including babies and the elderly. The death toll continues to rise as rescue workers recover more remains and reassemble mangled corpses for identification.

Somehow, few saw this eruption of inhumanity coming. Several months ago, Sven Kühn von Burgsdorff, then the European Union ambassador to the Palestinians, performed what he called Gaza’s first paragliding flight to advocate for a future where “anything is possible in Gaza.” Hamas terrorists would later use paragliders to massacre more than 250 civilians at an Israeli music festival, which is presumably not what the envoy had in mind. And he wasn’t the only one naive about the Hamas regime’s intentions.

The consensus was that Hamas was a mostly rational actor that could be reasoned with. To hawks, although the group was an anti-Semitic Iran proxy, it could be deterred through political and economic incentives, because it felt responsible for the welfare of the Gazan people. To doves, Hamas was a quasi-legitimate national resistance movement whose occasional bouts of violence were simply intended to draw attention to that struggle.

Successive Netanyahu governments and security officials, far less sympathetic to the Gazan plight, nonetheless spent recent years lifting economic restrictions on the enclave, granting thousands of work permits for Gazans, and transferring hundreds of millions of Qatari dollars to Hamas in exchange—they thought—for relative quiet.

But it turned out that Hamas wasn’t being pacified; it was preparing. The group was less committed to national liberation than to Jewish elimination. Its violence was rooted not in strategy, but in sadism. And in retrospect, well before the Rosh Hashanah plot, the signs of Hamas’s atrocious ambitions were all there—many observers just did not want to believe them. What Hamas did was not out of character, but rather the explicit fulfillment of its long-stated objectives. The shocking thing was not just the atrocity itself, but that so many people were shocked by it, because they’d failed to reckon with the reality that had been staring them in the face.

First, there is Hamas’s notorious charter, a Frankensteinian amalgam of the worst anti-Semitic conspiracy theories of the modern era—the very same that have motivated numerous white-supremacist attacks in the United States. “Our struggle against the Jews is very great and very serious,” the document opens. “It needs all sincere efforts … until the enemy is vanquished.” The charter goes on to claim that the Jews control “the world media, news agencies, the press, publishing houses, broadcasting stations, and others.” According to Hamas, the Jews were “behind the French Revolution, the Communist revolution and most of the revolutions we heard and hear about,” as well as World War I and World War II. The charter accuses Israel of seeking to take over the entire world, and cites as proof the most influential modern anti-Semitic text, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion, a Russian fabrication that purports to expose a global Jewish cabal.

“Israel will exist and will continue to exist until Islam will obliterate it,” Hamas declares in its credo. “The Day of Judgement will not come about until Muslims fight the Jews.” In case anyone missed the point, the document adds that “so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement.” In 2017, Hamas published a new charter, but pointedly refused to disavow the original one, in a transparent ruse that some respectable observers nonetheless took at face value.

In any case, Hamas communicated its genocidal intentions not just in words, but in deeds. Before it took control of Gaza, the group deliberately targeted Jewish civilians for mass murder, executing scores of suicide bombings against shopping malls, night clubs, restaurants, buses, Passover seders, and many other nonmilitary targets. Today, this killing spree is widely blamed for destroying the credibility of the Israeli peace movement and helping derail the Oslo Accords, precisely as Hamas intended. And it did not stop there. Since the group took power in Gaza, it has launched thousands of rockets indiscriminately at nearby civilian towns—attacks that continue at this very moment and that have boosted the Israeli right in election after election.

Hamas’s anti-Jewish aspirations were evident not only from its treatment of Israelis, but from its treatment of fellow Palestinians. Despite being the putative sovereign in Gaza and responsible for the well-being of its people, Hamas repeatedly cannibalized Gaza’s infrastructure and appropriated international aid to fuel its messianic war machine. The group boasted publicly about digging up Gaza’s pipes and turning them into rockets. It stored weapons in United Nations schools and dug attack tunnels underneath them. (Contrary to what you might have read on social media, Gaza does have underground shelters—they are just used for housing Hamas fighters, smuggling operations, and weapons caches, not protecting civilians.)

When dissenting Gazans attempted to protest this state of affairs and demanded a better future, they were brutally repressed. Hamas has not held elections since 2006. In 2020, when the Gazan peace activist Rami Aman held a two-hour Zoom call with Israeli leftists, Hamas threw him in prison for six months, tortured him, and forced him to divorce his wife. Why? Because his vision of a shared society for Arabs and Jews, however remote, was a threat to the group’s entire worldview. Jews were not to share the land; they were to be cleansed from it.

Simply put, what Hamas did two weekends ago was not a departure from its past, but the natural culmination of its commitments. The question is not why Hamas did what it did, but why so many people were surprised. Israel’s prime minister, Benjamin Netanyahu, quick to discern anti-Semitism in any effort to merely label Israeli products from West Bank settlements, somehow overlooked the severity of the genocidal threat growing next door. Journalists like me who cover anti-Semitism somehow failed to take Hamas’s overt anti-Jewish ethos as seriously as we should have. Many international leftists, ostensibly committed to equality and dignity for Palestinians and Israelis alike, somehow missed that Hamas did not share that vision, and in fact was actively working to obliterate it.

Today, in the ashes of the worst anti-Jewish violence since the Holocaust, some analysts have admitted their error of sanitizing Hamas. “It’s a huge mistake that I did, believing that a terror organization can change its DNA,” the former Netanyahu national-security adviser Yaakov Amidror told The New York Times. Others on the left have clung to their tortured conception of Hamas as a rational resistance group, despite it having been falsified by events. Perhaps some fear that acknowledging the true nature of Hamas would undermine the struggle for Palestinian self-determination. But in actuality, it is the refusal to disentangle Hamas’s anti-Jewish sadism from the legitimate cause of Palestinian nationalism that threatens the project and saps its support.

In 1922, The New York Times published its first article about Adolf Hitler. The reporter, Cyril Brown, was aware of his subject’s anti-Jewish animus, but he wasn’t buying it. “Several reliable, well-informed sources confirmed the idea that Hitler's anti-Semitism was not so genuine or violent as it sounded,” Brown wrote, “and that he was merely using anti-Semitic propaganda as a bait to catch masses of followers.” Two years later, the Times published another news item on the future architect of the Holocaust: “Hitler Tamed by Prison.” The Austrian activist, the piece said, “looked a much sadder and wiser man,” and “his behavior during his imprisonment convinced the authorities that [he] was no longer to be feared.”

Many got Hamas wrong. But they shouldn’t have. Again and again, people say they intend to murder Jews. And yet, century after century, the world produces new, tortuous justifications for why anti-Jewish bigots don’t really mean what they say—even though they do.

[unbidden-yidden-deactivated20240]

Jewish Song of the Day #35: Old Time Medley

Comments:

So in addition to a storied amount of overtly Jewish music, I also have a category of music that I like to call "quasi-Jewish" or "honorary Jewish" music. These are songs that are definitively not Jewish in some essential way, but also have some attribute or quality to them that makes them feel like home in a similar way — or that I might want to adapt into an explicitly Jewish version. Some Christian songs do this. Some work songs do this, including a number of sea shanties. Some queer folk music does this. And whenever I find one of these, I sort of file it away on my mental playlist of songs in this category.

Down to the River to Pray is definitely on that list, and so you can imagine my delight in finding an actual adapted to be Jewish version of it, by a group I already like, no less!

I hope you enjoy this one, and if anyone is interested in my "adjacent" list, I would consider making that a separate post of its own.

[historicity-was-already-taken]

I want to echo all the nice things people have said about your work, and add one more: I appreciate that your blog offers space to mourn the Holocaust. Not the Holocaust as a metaphor, not the Holocaust as a rhetorical invocation, but the Holocaust in and of itself. It provides a sobering kind of relief. When I was a kid learning about the Holocaust, my classes always showed me Life is Beautiful and The Boy in the Striped Pyjamas (UGH) and one teacher insisted that she wanted me to understand "how the Jews kicked Hitler's ass!" Which... no. On so many levels. So I admire how your work holds the dialectical truths of mass tragedy and brave resistance. Your scholarship matters, your mental health matters, and I can't wait to read your book next year!

This message is so lovely I was too verklempt to even answer it last night. Thank you, so much, for taking the time to write and send this.

And yes I totally get what you mean. It's not some, as you put it, rhetorical invocation populated by faceless martyrs, but the very real murders of millions of real, flawed, living, breathing humans. I think the rhetorical version, with its ideologies and hagiographies, is easier to swallow.

I hate most Holocaust movies. At least, American ones. They just want so badly for there to be a happy ending and...the Holocaust doesn't have one. [Unnamed legendary Jewish director] optioned the rights to [book similar in scope to mine which came out in the last 4 years] and I'm not even upset, because I don't enjoy that director's gentile-focused quasi-uplifting attempts to depict said events. Hitler said he was going to destroy the majority of European Jewry, and he did. In the space of 12 years he destroyed civilizations, cultures, and languages spanning 1000+ years; more, if you hold him responsible for the ethnic cleansing of MENA Jewish communities post-1948. Nothing uplifting there.

That's why I think I like weird, post-modern, magical realist approaches to Holocaust fiction [see: my boyfriend recently convinced me to watch Jojo Rabbit and Inglorious Basterds]. Telling any of these stories doesn't fit into Western narrative conventions. So make it weird; have the characters dance to David Bowie; make it a Western with subtitles; make the audience wonder if magic or just mundane in the specific context of the story. That's, imo, the only way to capture the sheer unreality of these very real events in fiction. I would LOVE a work of magical realist Holocaust fiction that involves the golem of Prague (if it exists omg tell me!) or something similar. Keeping in mind, of course, that I'm neither a film not a literary scholar. Just, as a historian who took one cultural criticism course in undergrad, those feels the most...right.

And oy your teacher. I feel for her; this is a difficult subject to teach. But...the Jews didn't kick Hitler's ass. That's the opposite of what happened. The Warsaw Ghetto Uprising is the most famous instance of organized Jewish resistance to the Holocaust, and those fighters only kicked ass until the Nazis (quickly) realized that they needed reinforcements and flamethrowers because oops these Jews came prepared. And even the fighters themselves knew that they weren't going to "win" anything. They were making a symbolic historical gesture/statement and fully expected to die. To the point that survivors almost uniformly express in their memoirs and testimonies that the ones who died fighting were the only real heroes and they rest of them are nbd, and this isn't something that should be talked about (which, is something that I'm trying to respect in my book! Like the fact that Zivia Lubetkin utterly rejected any attempt to describe her as a hero matters, even though that's how I personally view her).

Anyway I've rambled enough. Thank you again for the message!

[fromchaostocosmos]

For many, the starting point for these conversations is that Israel is a colonialist nation that was born in sin and acts in sin. This framing is a quasi-religious belief; a doctrine that is so sacrosanct that those who challenge it are invariably seen as immoral and racist. How did we get here? To understand that, it helps to explore the intellectual history of the past 80 years. This “original sin” narrative is anchored by three “posts” — postcolonialism, post-nationalism, and postmodernism. Each has its roots in the aftermath of World War II — the rejection of European hegemony over Arabs, Africans, and Asians (postcolonialism); the rejection of a belligerent European nation-state system (post-nationalism); and the eventual rejection of the enlightenment concept of fixed truths (postmodernism).  The State of Israel was also founded at that time. But post-theorists generally ignored the Jewish people’s deep ties to the land of their ancestors as well as 19 centuries of persecution, including against Middle Eastern Mizrahi Jews. Instead, they saw Israel as a white, European enterprise planted in the middle of an indigenous region and sought to delegitimize the nation and dehumanize its citizens from its birth.

Another article that I think is worth reading.

[justinspoliticalcorner]

Zack Beauchamp at Vox:

When Donald Trump flew to Pennsylvania for a 9/11 anniversary event this week, he brought an unusual companion: a 9/11 conspiracist named Laura Loomer. Loomer has been a quasi-journalist on the fringe right for about a decade, with a penchant for saying things that make even hardened MAGA types recoil. She is a self-described “proud Islamophobe” who has cheered the deaths of migrants and called for Muslims to be banned from driving for ride-hail apps. She ran for Congress twice, in 2020 and 2022, and failed both times. More recently, Loomer has called Kamala Harris a “drug-using prostitute” and warned that, if she wins, “the White House will smell like curry & White House speeches will be facilitated via a call center.” Despite all of this, Trump has long displayed a soft spot for Loomer. He endorsed her House bid in 2020 and, in 2023, tried to offer her a spot on his campaign — only to back down after aides revolted. Undeterred, he hosted her at Mar-a-Lago afterward, repeatedly boosted her content on Truth Social, and traveled with her on the 2024 campaign trail.

It’s not clear what Trump gets out of this relationship. But his ties to Loomer have become a major controversy since the 9/11 event, with some of the former president’s closest allies speaking publicly against Loomer. “The history of this person is just really toxic,” Sen. Lindsey Graham (R-SC) told the HuffPost. Rep. Marjorie Taylor Greene (R-GA) — who claimed a Jewish family was using space lasers to start wildfires! — thinks Loomer is a bridge too far, calling Loomer’s tweet about Harris and curry “appalling and extremely racist.” (Loomer responded by accusing Greene of sleeping with a “Zangief cosplayer.”) It’s hard to take these condemnations all that seriously. Trump and his vice presidential pick have spent this week pushing a nasty conspiracy theory about Haitian immigrants stealing and eating people’s pets that appears to have inspired real-world hate crimes. If you’re worried about racism and conspiracy theorizing, maybe take a look at the top of the ticket. But what makes Loomer different from Trump is that she has literally no filter. She says the quiet part out loud, every single time. The more time Trump spends with her, the harder it is to deny that his thinly veiled bigotry is anything but the genuine article. And that, for the Republican Party, is a very big problem indeed.

Who is Laura Loomer?

Loomer isn’t a household name for most Americans, but she’s been a presence in the conservative media ecosystem for quite some time. She first attracted attention in 2015 when, as a college senior at Barry University in South Florida, she secretly filmed a meeting with administrators in which she attempted to form a campus club supporting ISIS. The video was released by Project Veritas, the conservative group that specializes in (questionably edited) sting videos. Loomer worked for Project Veritas during the 2016 presidential campaign and learned to build a career out of political stunts. She grabbed the national spotlight in June 2017 when she stormed the stage at a performance of Shakespeare’s Julius Caesar in New York that dressed the Roman general like Donald Trump. The disruption earned Loomer a booking on Sean Hannity’s show.

“You were making a very strong point. I applaud you for what you’ve done,” Hannity told her. Loomer parlayed the notoriety from the Julius Caesar incident into a kind of internet celebrity on the pro-Trump right. The problem with celebrity, though, is that it can give you too many opportunities to show yourself. And Loomer proved to be someone with truly out-there opinions. After an ISIS supporter killed eight people with a truck in November 2017, she went on an Islamophobic rant on Twitter, blaming popular ride-hailing apps for employing Muslim drivers. “Someone needs to create a non Islamic form of Uber or Lyft because I never want to support another Islamic immigrant driver,” she wrote. The two services subsequently banned her, the first of many bans from high-profile tech platforms.

[...] This particular cocktail of hate speech and conspiracy theory misinformation became the hallmark of Loomer’s political style, prompting bans from major social media platforms. The straw that broke the camel’s back on Twitter, for example, came in November 2018 when Loomer tweeted that Rep. Ilhan Omar (D-MN) supported female genital mutilation because she is Muslim. In response to the ban, which came a year after Twitter stripped her blue check mark (then something given to notable people rather than a badge to be purchased) as punishment for similar false and offensive claims, Loomer physically chained herself to Twitter’s headquarters in New York while wearing a Nazi-style yellow star. It’s worth noting here that Loomer is Jewish but has long had tight links to the white nationalist movement. She is, for example, close with the avowed anti-Semite Nick Fuentes who dined with Trump in 2022, and once broadly boasted that “I’m going to fight for white people.”

Presenting herself as a victim of Big Tech censorship, she found allies in popular far-right publications like Breitbart as well as in Washington. In December 2019, then-President Trump retweeted a Loomer supporter calling for donations to her campaign. In May 2020, Rep. Paul Gosar (R-AZ) sent a letter to Attorney General Bill Barr calling on him to open an investigation into Loomer’s Facebook ban. She was reinstated on Twitter after Elon Musk’s purchase of the site.

[...]

Why Laura Loomer matters

There is a reason that Laura Loomer has even Marjorie Taylor Greene panicking, and it’s not just that the two reportedly have personal beef. It’s that Laura Loomer makes the rest of the Republican Party look terrible. For decades, right-wing flirtation with racism has taken place through dog whistles and coded messages. Ronald Reagan’s attacks on “welfare queens” didn’t involve actual racist slurs but conjured up a mental image for some white voters of a poor lazy Black woman exploiting taxpayer dollars to live comfortably. Liberals would call this rhetoric racism, conservatives would say liberals are just trying to shut down legitimate debate, and round-and-round we went. [...] But after capitulating to Trump, the GOP fell back into its old habits. No matter how outrageous Trump’s rhetoric and even his actions became — from the Muslim ban to family separation — liberal critiques were met with the same kinds of dismissals. Trump’s rhetoric about immigration and crime can’t be racist, they would say; he’s just speaking the language of forgotten Americans left behind by globalization. Liberals, they’d say, are making everything about race when it’s not.

Vox gives an insightful overview into the right-wing MAGA shill that's too toxic for even MTG and virulently anti-Islam hack Laura Loomer.

See Also:

MMFA: Donald Trump and “pro-white nationalism” pundit Laura Loomer: A guide to their relationship

MMFA: Trump amplified Laura Loomer on Truth Social over 20 times in 9 months

[the-garbanzo-annex-jr]

by Ruth Wisse

Hamas recently beat the competition with a demonstration of savagery unlike the earlier improvised pogroms in Europe to which it has been compared. October’s slaughters were plotted with crucial input from Gazans employed in Israeli homes they had scouted and mapped for the purpose, making this the first military campaign designed to culminate in acts of beheading, torture, and rape of predetermined victims. As attempts to destroy Israel through conventional warfare had only made Israel militarily stronger, the new tactics aimed at destroying the Jews’ will to remain among antagonists sworn never to leave them in peace. More than to intimidate, these attacks were made to demoralize.

Survivor-witnesses describe new refinements of psychological warfare. Hamas murdered parents and children in each other’s presence so as to sharpen the survivors’ agony. They took hostages—not, as others do, for eventual exchange—but to taunt the country with images of prisoners’ suffering, and fear that many would never be returned. Every Jewish value—respect for women, honoring the human being who was made in the image of God—was gleefully defiled.

As for the Jews living in nearby Gaza, many of them self-described Jewish “peaceniks,” they had prided themselves on the medical help and hospitality they extended to their Gazan neighbors, persuaded that cooperation was obviously to everyone’s benefit. The terrorists exploited the Jews’ desire for peace as a means of entrapment and further opportunity for torment. By attacking on a Jewish holiday and a secular festival, they intended to destroy the Israelis’ joy in life. Anyone reading Dan Senor and Saul Singer’s exhilarating book about the collective strengths that constitute The Genius of Israel will recognize how Hamas turned precisely those virtues into weapons of torture to tear the Jewish people apart.

October’s slaughters were plotted with crucial input from Gazans employed in Israeli homes they had scouted and mapped for the purpose, making this the first military campaign designed to culminate in acts of beheading, torture, and rape of predetermined victims.

Nor does this exhaust their inventiveness. The Arabs’ strategy of martyring generations of their own people in the cause of eliminating Israel dates back to the 1947 refusal of Arab leaders to accept the partition of Palestine into two states—in order to keep Arabs perpetually homeless. Arabs were to remain permanently displaced as evidence of Israel’s “occupation” while Israel integrated the over 800,000 Jewish refugees from Arab lands and granted participatory citizenship to over 2 million Arabs who chose to remain in its boundaries.

Taking this tactic of martyring their fellow Arabs to a new level, Hamas turned Gaza into suicide central. Above ground, residents were allowed to conduct a quasi-normal life, knowing that, below ground, every school, every hospital, and many private homes were booby-trapped for the Israelis whom their leaders would lure into their cities. The IDF continues to uncover a tremendous amount of infrastructure built over years, confirming Hamas’ intention of invading and killing Israelis en masse. In the words of one of its soldiers “[It] is clear they expected us to arrive and laid plans to exact a cost in the form of IDF casualties.” The attack of Oct. 7 had to be monstrous enough to provoke Israel into full-scale war in the hope of rescuing the hostages and destroying the terrorists—a plan that would also ensure the collateral death of as many Gazans as possible to attract Western sympathy.

[probablyasocialecologist]

A whole literature exists that analyses Zionist ideology, its meaning and significance, in ways that have mystified it into a quasi-religion, an identity, and a badge of honour for Jews. Yet, in its application to historic Palestine, Zionism was a simple, practical programme to take the land but not the people. Palestine, denuded of its Arab inhabitants, would become Jewish owned and so attain the Jewish ‘ethnic purity’ Zionism longed for. These aggressive and racist aims never changed over time, and no matter how much Palestinian land the state of Israel acquired, in Zionist terms, it was still short of the ultimate goal.

Ghada Karmi, One State: The Only Democratic Future for Palestine-Israel

[gothhabiba]

The Golden Arches, internationally recognised symbols of American corporate might and cultural diffusion, became in March 2002 the target of young Egyptians frustrated with what they perceived to be America's complicity in the onslaught of Israel's Prime Minister, Ariel Sharon, against the Palestinian Authority. McDonald's was not the only foreign establishment to suffer broken windows; photographs circulated on the web also included images of a similarly vandalised KFC restaurant in Cairo. Still, none can deny the special place held by McDonald's in the global fast-foodscape. In Egypt, the targeting of the Arches is particularly interesting, as it follows on the heels of a controversy that cut to the very heart of intersections between indigenous and imported mass culture, and popular, if somewhat disreputable, music was at the epicentre of the commotion.

A year earlier, the fast-food giant found itself compelled to scrap a remarkable advertising campaign designed to promote a new, indigenous product. [...] [E]fforts to market an Egyptian national dish became enmeshed directly with Middle East diplomacy—and its breakdown—through an ill-fated effort to link an 'authentic Egyptian' product to an 'authentic Egyptian' pop singer. The very attraction of that singer from a marketing standpoint lay in his recent recording of a potent political anthem which had quickly become a smash hit in Egypt's informal popular music sector.

In the spring of 2001, at the height of his career, veteran shbi singer Shaaban Abd al-Rahim suddenly discovered that his television advertisement for the new McFalafel had been cancelled, reportedly following complaints from the New York-based American Jewish Congress over the corporation's use of the singer to promote its product. This cancellation was a response to Shaaban's recent blockbuster hit, 'I hate Israel' (Ana bakrah Isra'il [أنا بكره إسرائيل]), a pulsating rap number that had made him, after some twenty years of steady work at the lower end of the wedding circuit, a figure of national renown, the anointed 'interpreter of the pulse of the Egyptian and Arab street' (Abd al-Hadi 2001, p. 39). Even more incongruously it had made him a figure to be courted, albeit not always with great appetite, by the cultural and artistic intelligentsia that had heretofore scorned him.

The story of Shaaban Abd al-llahim, his smash hit, and the McDonald's fiasco raises a variety of questions about the relationship between popular 'folk' music and official culture in Egypt. It points to the thriving popularity of a quasi-legitimate 'cassette culture' (Manuel 1993) in a broadcast market that is still rigidly controlled by state authorities and, perhaps even more, to potent political expression at the edge of sanctioned propriety (Gordon 2001). In addition, it points to the changing world of corporate sponsorship in an ever more globalised national economy, and the changing relation of art/artist and song/singer to the fast moving world of advertising. The contest over sponsorship of this particular product—McFalafel—points to the persistent power of national symbology, especially culinary and musical tropes, even if the former has, in this case, been constructed by the extra-territorial multi-national fast-food chain, and the latter co-opted to promote the product. Finally, the very deliberate turn to a singer like Shaaban Abd al-Rahim for product sponsorship, especially for a commercial to be broadcast on state-run television, underscores weakening boundaries between what is 'classically' approved and what is still considered to be 'vulgar' or 'low-class' music, however popular it may be among wide sectors of the population.

—Joel Gordan, "Singing the Pulse of the Egyptian-Arab Street: Shaaban Abd Al-Rahim and the Geo-PopPolitics of Fast Food." Popular Music 22.01 (2003), pp. 73-88.

[germiyahu]

I thought Muslims wanted to fight because every year on Ramadan there is a lot of police presence on the temple Mount and they view Israel as oppressing them. Were there wars and riots on Ramadan before police presence? I understood it as the Palestinian Muslims do not trust the Israelis to respect their holy place, which I know is holy to both, therefore they attack as resistance.

It’s quite rich hearing antizionists (not saying you are one) mock Jewish anxiety about what would happen should Israel fall as “crying about hypothetical genocide when a real genocide is happening.” Because that’s what this sounds like. Anxieties about the dirty non believers destroying their dearly held holy site, which Israel has never even attempted to do, all the while Gazans destroyed every synagogue in the strip in a series of riots as soon as they gained quasi independence.

Also, it’s rather a chicken and egg situation. Muslims are concerned about Israel disrespecting holy sites or repressing them during Ramadan, so they get unrestful. Israel, knowing that there’s an increase in terror attacks and unrest during Ramadan, increases its police presence and represses harder.

But all that is moot. I can’t remember off the top of my head if Muslims have ever used Ramadan to launch invasions or attacks prior to the second Intifada, but I do know very well that Jewish holy days have consistently been used to give Muslim attacks and invasions an element of surprise.

So frankly who cares if Ramadan is a month of resistance instead of a month of aggression. The rules for thee but not for me is getting so boring. Why are Yom Kippur and Simchat Torah and Shabbat and so many other days appropriate to slaughter Jews?

And this was not a precedent set by Muslims, let’s be clear. Palestinians did not invent this tactic, nor did any Arabs. This goes back to the Romans (maybe by coincidence) launching their final assault on Jerusalem on Tisha b’Av. It’s etched in stone that Jewish holy days are not worth respecting and in fact are excellent days for committing antisemitic violence because the Iudaeani/Yahūd/etc. won’t see it coming.

If there’s such a profound lack of humanity and disrespect going on, I frankly don’t give a shit, and will not hold my future cousins in Israel to any standard of giving a shit, if the IDF attacks during Ramadan. Despite what the Hamas propaganda tells you, the IDF’s objectives, unlike those of Hamas, are not to indiscriminately kill and rape and kidnap and torture. And the IDF’s tactics, unlike those of Hamas, are not to use a Muslim holy day/month as a cover for their assault and as a psychological attack via desecrating something sacred.

They’re not trying to offend Muslims, they’re just not willing to pause operations for 30 days without getting something in return. This is why Biden and Egypt and Qatar are trying to negotiate a ceasefire.