zenpundit.com

IS THERE SUCH A THING AS ” ANTI- ANTI-ANTI-SEMITISM ” ?

Milt Rosenberg over at Milt’s File reports that the well-known academic, public intellectual and Communitarian guru Amitai Etzioni has been unable to find an outlet to publish this piece that ties Mel Gibson’s film The Passion of the Christ to the wider revival of anti-semitism, particularly in Europe.

Normally, I would not give Dr. Etzioni a platform on Zenpundit because being moderately libertarian, I am not sympathetic to Communitarianism ( more on the philosophical roots of that movement here). Nor do I agree with Etzioni that Mel Gibson’s film will be a slick, 21st century Hollywood analog to Jud Suss but like Dr. Rosenberg I do find it a little odd that a thinker of Etzioni’s caliber could not find a publisher anywhere who was willing to accept such a highly topical op-ed piece. Editors have space to fill and in the main they’d rather publish articles from someone like Etzioni or Diane Ravitch or Robert Reich than one by unknown assistant prof from Big State school U. Particularly,if like Etzioni’s, the op-ed piece is a provocative one likely to grab attention for the newspaper.

Back in the 1970’s, in the aftermath of Vietnam, a surly ” anti – anti-communist” attitude migrated from leftist, intellectual, circles where it was fashionable to believe that Alger Hiss was a martyr and the Rosenbergs had been framed, to the wider media culture. Anti-anti-communism was not so much an argument or a position as it was a reflexive, emotional response of hostility toward any expression of views critical of Communist states followed by a desire to shout down the offender with a supposed litany of American misdeeds. With that in mind, I am wondering if we have not embarked upon the age of ” Anti-anti-anti-semitism “.

I’m not considering Holocaust deniers, globalization protestors with ” Zionazi ” signs or the clueless, young, topless, European women going to demonstrations outfitted as half-naked suicide bombers. Those people are simply anti-semites who mix Jew-hatred with their radical socialism and anti-Americanism. Rather, I’m referring to the newfound belligerence with which otherwise respectable people quickly dismiss Jewish concerns over increases in anti-semitic violence or attempt to suppress such information. I speak of those people who maintain they are stoutly ” anti-zionist ” in criticizing Israeli policies when what they actually want is not justice for Palestinians but for Israel to disappear quietly. Anti-anti-anti-semitism is a position of irritated weariness and antipathy instead of thought or reflection, more a dismissal born of an impatient disdain than of hatred. Nevertheless, it is no more logical than the anti-anti-communism of years past and it often can be found floating in the same tired, bitter, leftist political circles.

UNWARRANTED ASSUMPTION OF EXPERTISE

I just finished reading a couple of articles on George Soros’ recent stint at the University of Chicago as a better educated, much richer, more European version of Michael Moore. Even the author who was in sympathy with the position Soros was articulating was unimpressed with the force of his arguments which reminds me of a phenomenon I have often observed. I find it odd that people who have achieved notoriety in some field or accomplishment often believe this expertise or authority is transferrable to fields of which they know nothing but invite strong opinion – politics, the arts,religion, sports, economic policy and the like.

Soros is a bright man with enviable skill in financial markets but his political arguments at Chicago were so inconsistent that they probably could not have withstood testing by the grad students in the audience in a formal debate. Or perhaps even from the undergraduates. I have seen any number actors, musicians, doctors and scientists pontificate loudly on political or historical subjects of which they clearly know very little but they would find it bizarre if say, a historian or a political consultant lectured them about method acting or particle physics.

Perhaps this is a human temptation resulting from excessive ego or it is

simply that some topics seem to touch of all of us and we forget that these areas of common human interest often require as much experience or study to understand well as does more specialized subjects. James Carville, Dick Morris and Roger Ailes comprehend the American political process far,far better than most of their critics could ever hope to grasp yet we tend to feel our opinions are not only equally valid but more incisive as well.

NOW THEY WILL HAVE TO OPEN ALL OF THEIR MILITARY BASES

Iranian nuclear equipment found at military site.

ARE AGENTS OF PROLIFERATION ” FAIR GAME” IN THE WAR ON TERROR ?

The NYT just ran an article on the activities of alleged nuclear black marketeer and probable ISI agent B.S.A. Tahir which raises the question of how American policy regards such individuals in the context of the War on Terror.

Proliferation of nuclear weapons capability, technology, expertise and materials remains the gravest threat to national security and world peace. This problem was one justification for the Iraq war, the extreme tensions with North Korea, international pressure on Iran and it aggravates Pakistani-Indian clashes over Kashmir. Documents and other evidence siezed in Afghanistan by American forces indicate al Qaida has had a long term interest in acquiring some kind of nuclear or radiological bomb capability ( also here ).

With that in mind, how should the United States deal with shadowy individuals like Mr. Tahir who operate under the protection of authoritarian or corrupt regimes or their intelligence services ? In states not under the rule of law – which would be most nations outside of the West, Japan, South Korea and Israel such figures are only arrested not for criminal activities but because of intense outside political pressure. Even then, as in the case of Pakistan’s Khan, the arrest may only be a charade and nominal concession. Given the gravity of this threat and the paucity of legal options ( unless proliferators are operating from an allied state with a functioning and reliable justice system) to deal with perpetrators like Tahir and Khan shouldn’t the objective of the United States be suppression and deterrence ?

States that shelter such individuals should face high and painful costs, particularly to the personal interests of key political supporters of the regime as was done with Serbia in the Kosovo war. Ultimately, proliferation is a decision of state leadership either by ignoring it or directing it for profit or strategic advantage but risk taking middlemen like Tahir make the WMD black market function. Individuals like Tahir and Khan, where no legal remedy exists, should be treated in much them same vein as al Qaida leaders and have their activities interdicted by any effective means ranging from confiscating their assets to being treated as a military target. Generally, quieter is better for the United States but making examples of several high profile proliferators will serve to deter many other arms dealers from trafficking in nuclear technology. Why risk getting your head blown off or your bank account being sequestered when you can quietly sell less catastrophic merchandise without attracting American attention ?

ADDENDUM

Israeli arms merchant on trial for nuclear sales.

ADDENDUM II

Nuclear black market in Kazakhstan.

IMAGINE IF WE COULD HOOK PRESIDENTIAL CANDIDATES UP TO ONE OF THESE MACHINES

The debates would certainly sound a whole lot different !