Comments on: Update XI: Paleos Must Defend the West, And That Means Israel Too

By: gunjam

gunjam — Sun, 18 Jan 2009 04:54:31 +0000

Yeah, I thought so. So much for the cycle of violence.

Amen: It has been said elsewhere a number of times (I do not know the original source OR the EXACT wording) that: “If Hamas (or the Palestinians) disarmed, there would be peace in that region, whereas, if Israel disarmed, she would be liquidated in short order.”

By: gunjam

gunjam — Sun, 18 Jan 2009 04:47:11 +0000

Yeah, it’s almost as though some Christians forget Jesus was as Jewish as they come.

Indeed they do (forget). In fact, a major rift within Christian circles apropos of the interpretation of OT prophecy (which, by definition, involves references to “Israel”) is the pits the “Replacement” school (i.e., Reform and Roman theologians) vs. the Dispensationalists (i.e., most modern evangelicals/charismatics). The difference? The Replacement folks see the “Church” as the “new Israel,” having replaced you folks with Abraham’s DNA in your veins, whereas the Dispensationalists see Israel in OT prophecy as, well, ISRAEL (granted, a future Israel, renewed and believing in Yeshua as their Messiah). The practical effect of adherence to the “Replacement” school of theology is to want to try to de-Judaize the Gospels, etc, with the effect that Jesus becomes virtually and “honorary” Gentile. He was no Gentile: He was as Jewish as they come. Amen.

By: Myron Pauli

Myron Pauli — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 18:19:10 +0000

Thank you for showing me Paul Gottfried’s post. Certainly the neocons are awful and they are self-proclaimed “friends” of Israel but that doesn’t make Israel always wrong or Hamas always right. Meanwhile, Buchanan’s American Conservative magazine has an article by Glenn Greenwald about the rather idiotic neocon inspired resolution passed nearly unanimous by Congress (proclaiming Fatah to be the legitimate government of Palestine and that Israel should be a Jewish state as if the religious character of foreign countries is the business of the US Congress!). However, Buchanan’s magazine also has a rather vile article by Professor (!) John Mersheimer at
http://www.amconmag.com/article/2009/jan/26/
00006/ where Israel’s withdrawal from Gaza in 2005 was part of a plot to strangle Gaza and how Israel is DELIBERATELY targeting Palestinian civilians. If the latter accusation was true, then deliberately killing ONLY 200 – 500 in 3 weeks with F-16’s and tanks shows Israel to be extremely incompetent considering the Rwandan Hutus were able to kill 800,000 in a similar time frame with machetes! The article from a so-called professor is completely idiotic and Buchanan should be ashamed to run such trash. A case might be made against Israel’s incursion in Gaza but not the one by Mersheimer.

By: Bearded Spock

Bearded Spock — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 09:40:28 +0000

As a paleolibertarian, the most relevant issue for me is whether or not the U.S. government should be providing weapons and money to Israel while also simultaneously sending aid to the Arab nations also. I understand that the conflict in fantastically complex and that there are grudges that go back centuries if not longer, but what’s that to us? It is painful for me to even think in terms of groups like “Palestinians” and “Israeli or Jew” particularly when there are at least three distinct definitions of each group (religious, ethnic and political).
I respect people’s right to defend themselves, and I hope you can respect my right to stay neutral. I’m not your enemy. Please don’t turn me into one by forcing me to choose sides.

By: razib

razib — Sat, 17 Jan 2009 01:40:26 +0000

ilana, apologies about the misspelling. [no problem; it happens all the time.–IM] to your points:

This ethical monotheism, developed centuries before classical Greek philosophy, is echoed throughout the Hebrew Bible (Exodus), and expounded upon by the classical prophets

i disagree. i don’t take the biblical chronology at face value. judaism, as opposed to the tribal cult of the hebrews, can not be understood except in light of influences and syntheses with greek and persian (zoroastrian) ideas in the period between the babylonian exile and the maccabees. i don’t think it is really appropriate to speak of the “gifts of the jews” or the “gifts of the greeks.” western civilization is a synthesis of various strands, and decoupling the hellenic from the hebrew is a fool’s errand. i reject the term judeo-christian because it privileges the judeo over the hellenic. christianity is what it is, with myriad influences. no adjective is necessary.

as for the westernness of the non-ashkenazi jews that’s an empirical question. [I said, through my analogy, that the system was western; not necessarily the people.–IM] i hope that they can be full assimilated into the norms of the west, and many were already oriented in that direction once european colonialism offered opportunities to minorities in muslim lands (e.g., the sassoon’s). my point is that even among the jews of israel there are those who i think can fair be termed non-western; the haredi and even some of the other religious observant jews who have made more concessions to modern life. modern orthodox ashkenazi by the fact that they are ashkenazi have a foot in the west, do the orthodox non-ashkenazi (by orthodox i am excluding the haredi but referring to the religious observant).

best
razib

By: Myron Pauli

Myron Pauli — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 21:10:28 +0000

On Jewish contributions to culture:
(1) Several “Christian” contributions came from Jews who wound up converting during the last millenium and their descendents; (2) Jewish and Christian cultures enriched each other; (3) During the “golden age” of Islam – Islam took contributions from Jews, Christians, Hindus, etc. (4) This week’s Torah portion has a lesson in it for all: Exodus 1:11 – Pharaoh first tries to suppress the Jews with taxes – Exodus 1:13 – Jews get enslaved – NOTE: Taxes first followed by slavery – so there is much to learn from the old Torah for all of us.

By: Robert

Robert — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 15:02:33 +0000

Ilana,
(Did I spell it right?)Great post. I would refer any thinking person who wants to dispute your facts to Pope Benedict’s book, Jesus of Nazareth. I especially was humored by the very Jewish assertion in your post that “Jesus stood on the shoulders of giants.” Woman, is that ever an understatement!! I have admired your tenacity from a distance for years but you are not only tenacious, you have retained something that is becoming rare in both of our traditions and that is an intelligence combined with good manners. God Bless your “irreligious?” and great soul!! Don’t let the bastards drive you down.

[Thank you so much.–IM]

By: Myron Pauli

Myron Pauli — Fri, 16 Jan 2009 13:52:02 +0000

Concerning Richard Spencer’s article: I was told that my Austrian-Czech atheistic-Jewish grandfather thought Jews should settle in Canada and Australia and not in the Middle East and perhaps Herzl and the early Zionists can be faulted for moving (for historical and religious reasons) to a bad location. Israel’s actions are faulted in that they will not completely vanquish Hamas (or Hezbollah, etc.) and therefore will not achieve some permanent peace. But who is to say that there is some permanent peace to be had. In Math and Physics, one learns that some items do not have “solutions” such as knowing the exact position and momentum of a particle or solving a 3-body problem in 3 dimensions. Israel wins as it has over 3000 years by surviving. If it has to respond to quasi-suicidal jihadists every few years in order to survive, then it is part of the survival process which is more important (to it) than the peace process. Nevertheless, it is the responsibility of Israel to defend itself – the rest of the West need not “defend” it but also should not be rushing to provide aid or encouragement to the quasi-suicidal jihadist mentality that is Hamas.