TUESDAY, OCTOBER 17, 2023
Levitz said the same thing: In the beginning, it was Art Linkletter who discovered the basic fact.
Kids say the darndest things, he reported, on live TV, back in the 1950s. He would even bring kids on his TV show to establish this basic finding.
As it turns out, it isn't just 9-yeat-old kids! College kids sometimes say (and do) the darndest things, and some college instructors do too.
So it was when a Stanford instructor decided to take an odd approach last week in two sections of College 101, a required freshman year course. In a recent column for the New York Times, Pamela Paul describes what apparently happened:
PAUL (10/14/23): Stanford is in the throes of a teachable moment right now, and it’s not a good one.
In an opinion column in The Stanford Daily on Tuesday, the Stanford Students for Justice in Palestine called Hamas’s butchery “part of the ongoing, decades-long struggle against Israeli oppression” and said Palestinians have “the legitimate right to resist occupation, apartheid and systemic injustice.”
A lecturer in one class [last Tuesday] asked Jewish students to raise their hands, then took one of the Jewish student’s belongings and told him to stand apart from everyone else, saying that was what the Israelis did to the Palestinians, a student who was in the class told me. In a later section, another student in the class told me, he turned to an Israeli student and asked how many Jews died in the Holocaust. When that student said six million, the teacher replied, many more millions died in colonization, which is what he said Israel was doing to the Palestinians. He then asked all of the students to say where they were from and depending on the answer, he told them whether they were colonized or colonizer. When a student said, “Israeli,” he called the student a colonizer.
Is that an accurate account of what the instructor said and did? According to CNN, an internal investigation is underway at Stanford.
That said, if a teenager hails from (let's say) the United States, does that mean that the teenager is "a colonizer?" That strikes us as a fairly dumb way to approach a legitimate world-wide historical problem. But at times of vast disorder, pleasing thunder will often overwhelm our limited human discernment.
In truth, we human beings frequently say (and do) the darndest things! That can include young college instructors. It can even include experienced public school teachers, a point we expect to revisit by the end of the week.
People say the darndest things! By now, it's an established fact.
At the Times, Paul strongly disapproved of this young instructor's alleged behavior. Beyond that, she was plainly appalled by the butchery committed by Hamas.
There's no reason why she shouldn't have made those assessments. But we were struck by the way she ended her column:
PAUL: In an academic atmosphere in which people can be divided between colonizers and colonized, oppressors and oppressed, with individuals judged by their identity, many students don’t seem to understand that you don’t have to be Jewish or Zionist to recognize terrorism. That you don’t have to be right-wing to denounce the slaughter of women and children. Condemning violence and the barbaric rape and murder of civilians doesn’t require taking a side.
It takes basic morality. Everyone at Stanford should know that.
Our view? It's easy to get upset when a young instructor displays a lack of basic discernment. Beyond that, very few people in this country will be inclined to support the killings, and the hostage takings, performed by Hamas last week.
It may be harder to form productive moral assessments, the kinds of assessments which might help us humans address our most intractable problems.
Pamela Paul is a good, decent person. Still and all, consider the things she said as she ended her column:
She denounced "the slaughter of women and children." That's a standard type of formulation, one which can almost seem to ignore the possible slaughter of men.
She also condemned "the barbaric rape and murder of civilians." More generally, she condemned violence itself.
She seemed to say that "many students" don't seem to understand these basic moral precepts. In the end, we're not sure it's quite as simple as that.
Over at New York, Eric Levitz was also concerned with the killing of women and children. But he was thinking of a different set of women and children, many of whom had already died by the time Paul's column appeared.
One college instructor may have said some dumb things last week. We're not sure what is surprising about that.
Other young people may have said some dumb things too. Some college presidents were so accused too, though we'll have to say that some cherry-picking may have been involved in some of these widely-discussed assessments.
Meanwhile, our nation's news culture is stunningly dumb, and has been for a very long time. As a nation, we'll soon return to our Cupcake Wars, and to our fascination with the alleged and apparent girl friends of NFL stars.
No, it isn't just the kids! For today—with apologies, and gnashing our teeth—we're going to leave it at that.
Well, this just goes to demonstrate that highfalutin pompous moralizing can go both ways. And in the end everyone is none the wiser.
ReplyDeleteStill, dueling pompous moralizings are better than pompous moralizings always aimed at the same target, right? I mean, haven't you, Bob, been saddened by the disappearance of the Crossfire show?
So, here, in spirit of Crossfire, you have good, decent Pamela Paul vs. the Stanford Students for Justice in Palestine. Finally. Be happy.
"our fascination with the alleged and apparent girl friends of NFL stars."
ReplyDeleteIn this case, there is a big disparity in popularity and fame between the girlfriend and the NFL player. Arguably, Taylor Swift makes more money, has a bigger audience and fan base, and has been a public figure much longer than her current boyfriend, whose name is not at all recognizable to anyone who doesn't follow football closely. Not to mention her movie, which is getting positive reviews.
Yet Somerby chooses to designate the NFL player as the subject of his sentence and Taylor Swift as a generic girlfriend of the important figure in that sentence, the football player. Somerby could have said "alleged relationships between country singers and football players," but he didn't. He made an incredibly successful person like Taylor Swift the hanger on to a football "star" as if the girlfriend cannot be a star in her own right and has no claim to fame beyond being romantically involved with a football player.
Language matters. In this case it shows relative prominance between two sets of people, girl friends and star football players. The girlfriends have no identity beyond their relationship status to someone else, and being female since they are designated as girls. They do not hold their own jobs, have no accomplishments of their own, are not people but appendages to those star football players.
In this case, the language Somerby has chosen to disparage public interest in Swift and her latest boyfriend (see how this works) reflects sexism and misogyny. Football is important but what Swift does is not, in his sentence. Somerby does this a lot, which is how we know his attitude toward women. If you put a constant flood of these sorts of remarks together over time, you have a society that says plainly that what women do is unimportant compare to men, and that even the most wildly successful of women are just girlfriends compared to those NFL football stars. Because men come first, and shouldn't be embarrassed by mentioning that their girlfriend might just be the more famous of the couple.
Try decaf.
DeleteCheck your privilege, Hector.
Delete“…fascination with the alleged and apparent boyfriends of wildly famous popstars.”
DeleteAnonymouse 1:02pm would still be griping.
Cecelia, that is not what Somerby actually said. Did you miss every single point in my comment? I am not arguing that anyone should be seen as an appendage of anyone else. Why would it be difficult to just say "fascination with the alleged and apparent relationships between wildly famous popstars and NFL football stars" (it isn't clear why Somerby pluralized that).
DeleteThat would give everyone their due instead of placing either gender above the other. Is equality realy a concept that difficult for you to understand?
Swift’s songs are boring. Football is moronic.
DeleteThe issue of the accomplishments and status of pop starlets, particularly in their relationships with NFL players, is unrelated to the main topics presented today by Somerby.
DeleteToday's post discusses the sensationalism and shallowness in news culture, as well as the tendency to focus on trivial or celebrity-related matters rather than addressing significant global problems.
My point was Somerby’s sexist language.
DeleteI know. Your point is poorly reasoned departs from the substance of the post. It's neurotic, trolling bullshit.
DeleteSays who? A troll like you?
DeleteYour point is poorly reasoned and departs totally from the substance of the post. That's trolling, Jack.
DeleteYou are full of bullshit from the boot heel to the hat brim.
And who thinks that? A troll.
DeleteWho is arguing that the businesses who own our media would rather focus on trivia, instead of reporting the inherent fascism of the Republican Party?
DeleteName names, please.
No doubt I'm biased, but I don't agree with Bob's defense of the un-named instructor. Bob wrote
ReplyDeleteOne college instructor may have said some dumb things last week. (Emphasis added)
May? IMO this instructor said and did some things that were worse than dumb. YMMV
I agree that something was askew with the instructor's lesson, but college students are not snowflakes. Their outrage strikes me as disproportionate to the offense, which was to confront them with a diverging perspective. They are not in college to be coddled cognitively speaking, sad or not.
DeleteAnonymouse 1:59pm, those students are not in college to be called colonizers based upon their ethnic and/or religious heritage.
DeleteNOT objecting would mean they were snowflakes.
@3:28 PM
DeleteNot based upon "their ethnic and/or religious heritage", but based upon where they were from. According to the quote.
Someone from Puerto Rico, for example, might be called "colonized", and consequently someone from the US "colonizer".
Anonymouse 3:28pm, actually, it would be any of those three- ethnicity, religious, or national heritage.
DeleteThat sort of thinking is the foundation of intersectionality and equity, diversity, and inclusion curriculum that’s being debated now.
It is pretty hard to deny that the US is full of the descendants of colonizers. Why then is it wrong to say so?
DeleteIndigenous Puerto Ricans were colonized. Spanish Puerto Ricans were colonizers. Black Puerto Ricans were enslaved.
Delete@4:31 PM "ethnicity, religious, or national heritage"
DeleteSorry, but it doesn't have to have anything to do with either one of those (btw, what's a "national heritage"? Is it, like, Athenian Parthenon?).
It's quite simple, really. American Samoa is a colony. The US is the metropole. Therefore, if you are a US citizen, it makes you a "colonizer". As a US citizen, you own a colony, American Samoa.
I realize that this is not a common why to think about these things, but I don't see anything 'outrageous' in it either. Perfectly acceptable for explaining the concepts.
Colonizing is not all bad. It provided benefits to colonies. For one thing, it results in development and guaranteed markets for the colony’s industries or goods.
DeleteUS territories vote in our elections and have representation. Puerto Rico has voted not to become a state or independent.
This comment has been removed by the author.
ReplyDeleteStanford is a private university. We are not told anywhere the name of the instructor or his ethnic identity (which might be Palestinian or arab and thus sympathetic to Gaza issues). We are not told why colonialism was a subject in a course called College 101 at all. But Stanford can teach what it wants, how it wants, without interference by right wing activists who are concerned that Students feel bad, even Jewish students. Stanford is a private university.
ReplyDeleteI suspect that many non-academics are unaware of the incursion of politics onto campuses in a variety of ways. I have worked at both public and private universities and have seen first-hand what happens at various schools.
First, on public campuses, it is a free speech issue that individuals promoting various causes be allowed to congregate in front of the Student Unions and proselytize students passing by. There are often tables set up for that purpose. Some are legitimate campus organizations, as exist for both Jewish students and those supporting Palestinian issues at Stanford. Some have no real connection to the school, except a tenuous registration, and they include Scientologists, Christian evangelists, vendors selling products, and political groups, such as people protesting the Armenian genocide, and pro-Palestinian organizations. The latter are highly visible and highly vocal and were present during the decades I taught, not just during a crisis like this one. It would be surprising if they did not make inroads among students. They have paid activists who work hard to achieve opinion change in a group that is young, well-meaning and open to change.
The other form of political lobbying involves the faculty. A wealthy arab country or individual (such as Saudi Arabia) donates a great deal of money to a private university, and then "suggests" that a specific speaker from the Arab world be invited to present his ideas on campus. As a faculty member, I was provided with the speaker's work and told to offer extra credit to students to attend the speech, perhaps to assign the speech as course content. The benefit is to expose young minds at well-respected universities to ideas that they might otherwise not encounter, so that they would be open to other perspectives after graduation and placement in influential positions and jobs. Sometimes such a scholar is offered a visiting professor position and spends a year influencing students. These academic influencers mingle with legitimate international scholars who have real accomplishments in their fields, but students are not very sophisticated at telling who is who. This is propagandizing, not teaching and not scholarship. And it is widespread and happens at top universities, who are not immune to the gifts and money offered.
So, blaming the instructor may be scapegoating someone who is himself a victim of coordinated propagandizing on campuses. And you only hear one side, the Palestinian side, without an effort to balance it, as few students who are not Jewish receive.
Somerby appears to be ignorant on this topic. His bleating about morality and discernment are unhelpful. Morality has little to do with anyone except those delivering humanitarian aid.
“Morality has little to do with anyone except those delivering humanitarian aid.”
DeleteMorality is at the center of thought. Adults are propagandized when they allow themselves to be propagandized. Despite any and all bleating about victimization.
Better trolling please.
DeleteFor better trolling, upgrade to Hector+
DeleteI'd sign up to Hector+ in a heartbeat.
DeleteSockpuppets pretending to be friends, how sweet!
DeleteBy "sockpuppet" I presume you mean to suggest that I'm actually Somerby pretending to be Dogface George. I can assure you that you're wrong about that.
DeleteAnd I'm wondering: Are you in the habit of making accusations without evidence?
“So, blaming the instructor may be scapegoating someone who is himself a victim of coordinated propagandizing on campuses. And you only hear one side, the Palestinian side, without an effort to balance it, as few students who are not Jewish receive.
DeleteSomerby appears to be ignorant on this topic. His bleating about morality and discernment are unhelpful. Morality has little to do with anyone except those delivering humanitarian aid.”
Yesterday, Bob was being excoriated for NOT being outraged and judgmental as to deeply inappropriate behavior by the involved individuals. He was too weak to take a strong stand against such obvious outrage.
Today Bob is too unsophisticated and uninformed to understand the complexities inherent in these dynamics.
Another day…the same ole disingenuous anonymices.
Yesterday, Somerby didn't take a stand about ANYTHING. Today, I accused Somerby of not understanding what is happening on many college campuses.
DeleteYour odd summaries of what other people said are concerning because they illustrate how little you understand of what people comment here. It is your right to be ignorant and stupid, but you do tend to confuse discussion by introducing things no one actually said and attributing those statements to other people who didn't say them. That just generates confusion.
On the other hand, perhaps that is your troll function here. To jump in the middle of discussions and create chaos. It is what Trump has been doing, on a global scale. Maybe that is the part that stupid people identify with when they support Trump -- the chaos that comes from ignorance and stupidity.
No Dogface -- I was suggesting that you are also Hector. No one thinks you could be Somerby. I think Somerby is Corby (and vice versa).
DeleteYou may not know this, but calling people ignorant and stupid does not prove your intelligence.
DeleteI'm not Hector, though I'm flattered you might think I am.
DeleteIt's funny. Someone uses a nym and the Hit-and-Hide Anonymice feel there must be something fishy about that.
DeleteI'm not saying whether I am or am not Dogface George. But it is true I've never seen both of us in different places at the same time.
DeleteHector is much funnier than I am.
DeleteAnonymouse 3:44pm, today, you are engaging in a "discussion" that essentially critiques Bob for his character traits, understanding, and methods of dealing with the aftermath of the attack on Israel.
DeleteThese are character traits and approaches to the issue that you had yesterday bemoaned as being absent or insufficient.
No one is hiding from anyone here. "Hit and hide" is not a thing. Every single comment has a nym attached to it -- some are using the nym Anonymous and it is their right to do that without harrassment from you assholes.
DeleteCecelia, today I suggested that Somerby does not understand the nature of propaganda by Palestinian supporters on college campuses. I do not see that as an attack on Somerby, but an addition to the discussion about why that instructor may have done what he did. YOU are criticizing me for my comment which you see as an attack on Somerby. That is your problem, not anyone else's here.
DeleteLooking for consistency across commenters so that you can accuse other people of something is not really what discussions are all about. But I get it that you aren't good at thinking about political issues and thus want to reduce everything to personalities. You would be better off if you stuck to social media (where social stuff belongs) and didn't poke your nose into every single thread, demanding to have the last word, even when you have nothing whatsoever to say on most topics. It isn't cute or charming -- it is annoying and takes up space.
Before you got here, there might be 30-40 comments, all mostly substantive (except for Mao). Now there are 50-80 comments even when Somerby has not posted anything. It is wasting everyone's time and irritating to scroll through.
Corby is adorable.
DeleteDogface, I do not have to prove my intelligence, but if I were ignorant, I would do something about it. Somerby frequently mentions things I am not familiar with. When he does that, I go look it up. It is why I read My Antonia and The Lady with the Lapdog and the bio of Godel and rewatched Casablanca and Vertigo, and read something about the Bronze Age.
DeleteIf someone is called ignorant and doesn't go look up whatever is being discussed, then I would add the adjective lazy. An educated person forms the habit of looking up all kinds of things during a day, depending on what they encounter in their lives. Suzanne Sommers died a few days ago. If you didn't know who she was, you should have looked her up. There is no excuse for remaining ignorant with so many internet and library resources available to remedy it.
I enjoy talking with the people here who do that. I learn things from them. That absolutely does not include Cecelia or you and Hector or the moronic troll fixated on Corby.
Somerby's blog used to discuss education a lot more. It attracted people interested in teaching and learning, which meant people who value curiosity. Those kinds of people are always interesting to listen to, no matter what they are discussing. But the ratio of noise to signal has changed for the worse and you guys are part of the reason.
You don't have to be idiots. You could be a whole lot less ignorant. All you have to do is care about knowing stuff, read more and talk less. Do it in little pieces -- just look up whatever you don't know and are curious about on whatever blogs you choose to visit.
Let's review the bidding. You began by calling me a sockpuppet; you raised by calling me ignorant and stupid; and now you're bemoaning the lack of high-quality civil discourse that you're so used to?
DeleteOh, and be sure to take up at least five long paragraphs to respond.
DeleteNo, I am bemoaning the interference by trolls in high quality discourse. There are quite a few others here who say interesting things. Not you, not Cecelia, not Hector.
DeleteOK. You hit me. Now go and hide.
DeleteAnonymouse 4:44pm, oh, come now. Yesterday you were on Bob’s case as you claimed that he is intrinsically weak and constitutionally unable to condemn an obvious wrong as revealed throughout his blogging history.
DeleteToday, Bob is sadly misinformed as to all the subtleties as to institutional influence peddling and political propagandizing.
Wouldn’t today’s claims mean that Bob was wise in not coming to an instantaneous judgment as you and your fellow anonymices had been bemoaning? Wouldn’t that restraint be a sign of self-awareness and thoughtfulness rather than the fecklessness you were exclaiming over yesterday?
As always, get real, anonymouse. You don’t really believe that anyone is blind to your operation here. That no one would notice the absurdity of never being able to agree with someone on anything. Of Somerby being a daily source of outrage.
That you’re here to talk politics is clear, but it’s not about issues. It’s not about clarity or furthering understanding, unless it’s that we all agree that something is rotten at The Daily. Howler.
That last consideration is legitimate one. There is something rotten here. It’s you.
You wish.
DeleteCecelia, influence peddling is not the same as influencing students.
DeleteSomerby said the instructor used poor judgment.
“When he does that, I go look it up. It is why I read My Antonia and The Lady with the Lapdog and the bio of Godel and rewatched Casablanca and Vertigo, and read something about the Bronze Age.”
DeleteI can wholeheartedly attest to the fact that anonymouse 5:17pm, has never once concurred with Bob as to the appropriateness of using any these references in any context of his blogging.
As recently as yesterday, we were regaled on the inappropriateness of the Casablanca reference.
Personally, I was Shocked! Shocked! at Bob’s…high handed approbating …gall… It reminded me of the Zionists in a way that isn’t opportunistic and self-serving at all…
Anonymouse 7:39pm, big donors (as was mentioned) are.
DeleteLook up the definition of influence peddling.
DeleteRich men sell their influence for things that aren’t always cash.
DeleteCorby is influential.
DeleteYou used the wrong term and I said nothing about influence peddling. Admit your mistake and look up the term.
DeleteSo what are the beneficiaries of big donations selling?
DeleteI looked up influence peddling in the dictionary and there was a huge picture of Joe Biden and his son sitting on a sack full of 20 million dollars funneled into shell companies from scumbag oligarchs in the exact corrupt countries with whom the sleazy, ghoulish, scumfuck Joe was engaging in diplomatic efforts.
DeleteFuck off
DeleteBiden is the corrupt scumbag who did it and got caught. I'm sure you saw the recent poll about what people think about Biden's corruption with Hunter. Not good for Democrats.
DeleteIf you are a Dem and want the party to be seen as ethical you need to tell Biden to fuck off.
Lies
DeleteI wish.
DeleteBoth Biden and Trump have children who are drug addicts. OTOH, only Trump, of the two is also a drug addict (Adderall).
DeleteOur focus should not be on war and its atrocities but on the causes of war and the failure to resolve them using other means.
ReplyDeletePeople should be asking why Hamas attacked at this time and what they hope to accomplish by doing it. I don't see anyone talking about that.
It is futile to discuss emotional responses to horrors of war, agreeing that it is bad, without trying to figure out how to deal with the larger conflict.
Somerby is, of course, using this situation to advance his own agenda. Here is his bottom line:
"Meanwhile, our nation's news culture is stunningly dumb, and has been for a very long time. "
How trivial does that sound and should it be the point when there are dead babies? I find this line particularly offensive in Somerby's post:
"Tomorrow: 583 children?"
Unless he is going to tell us those kids took a NAEP test, I think it is wrong to use harm to children as a club to beat up on journalists, while refusing to express any concrete opinion on anything else. He won't even say that Taylor Swift is dating a football player, without the word alleged. There is your example of moral courage!
Typical "Somerby doesn't talk about what I want to talk about!" comment.
DeleteDo you think it is appropriate to use dead children as bait to castigate journalists? I am saying he is crass and unfeeling if he does that -- not complaining because he isn't talking about NAEP scores.
DeleteThis is dense, even for you Dogface. Did you even read the comment?
"Kids say the darndest things, he reported, on live TV, back in the 1950s. He would even bring kids on his TV show to establish this basic finding."
ReplyDeleteFor the record, Art Linkletter was not a reporter. He was the host of an entertainment show in which videos of kids were edited for humor and cuteness. Adult quips were scripted.
Why does Somerby describe this ancient TV show as if it were reporting? Why mention it at all, except that it has the word "Kids" in the title? The children on the show were all 4-7 years old.
Anonymouse 1:51pm, how many diligent and sincerely open-minded hours did you spend on You Tube doing due diligence to this show?
DeleteWhy would Somerby pretend it was reporting. I’ve seen the show. Have you?
DeleteI watched it when I was a little kid. It was very entertaining. Now that I know that Linkletter was a Republican, I won't watch it on YouTube.
DeleteDid you know that there was a nineties remake of it?
DeleteFrom the land of Nickelodeon, it was reported that kids still say the Farnese things.
Farnese?
DeleteIt was the 90’s.
DeleteWhat is Farnese?
DeleteCovfefe
DeleteA logical solution would be to cede Gaza to Egypt, but Egypt doesn't want them.
ReplyDeleteWhy did Hamas attack Israel? Does it hope to conquer Israel militarily? Did it think it could kill all Israelis and what did it hope to gain by doing that? Will it expand into the area where people were killed? What does Hamas gain?
ReplyDeleteBob sucks as a cultural anthropologist.
ReplyDeleteNot according to Future Anthropologists Huddled in Caves.
DeleteHaters call them dreams.
DeleteA hater put them in a cave. Somerby.
DeleteAnonymouse 7:52pm, good thing you’re not a hater.
DeleteI have respect, Somerby doesn’t.
DeleteAnonymouse 8:23pm, you have militancy. That’s all.
Deletemilitancy definition: "the use of confrontational or violent methods in support of a political or social cause"
DeleteI suggested that referring to anthropologists in caves is disrespectful of anthropologists and Cecelia says I have "militancy," again using a word whose meaning she does not understand.
There was nothing about my dislike of Somerby's disrespect for those with expertise that suggests I would use violence or confrontation in support of a political or social cause. That word is entirely inappropriate in this context, which is a discussion about anti-intellectualism in the way Somerby talks about academic experts, ridiculing anthropologists for example.
Cecelia doesn't understand what I mean but she is fine with name-calling, because that is what calling someone militant for defending anthropologists is about. I have NEVER advocated violence or been confrontational over any issues here in comments. Not EVER. But calling Democrats or liberals names is what the right wing does.
This is why I consider Cecelia a troll and not worth trying to discuss anything with. Not only is she ignorant and stupid, but she attacks people when backed into a corner using the favorite labels of the right wing.
Now I predict that Cecelia will be back with some increasingly ugly remark, because she always seems to need to have the last word. Even when it is empty or foolish or non-responsive.
DeleteShorter Anon: “Stupid, ignorant, foolish Cecelia is a troll because she calls me names.”
DeleteNo, it is because she does nothing but call names.
DeleteYou can imagine where Dumb in Cluelessness read about Palestinians preventing evacuations. If he said today is Tuesday, I wouldn't believe him.
ReplyDeleteWell, if we are to accept the view that Israel is a European settler-colonial entity in Palestine, then terrorizing the settlers ups the costs of maintaining this entity. Some of the settlers will now lose the nerve and leave. Others will start thinking of leaving, and keeping them there will cost additional money.
ReplyDeleteThe place has never been self-sufficient; it's unsustainable without significant US subsidies. A few massive attacks (of different kinds) might just make it too costly. Considering, also, the diminishing importance of middle-eastern oil.
It seems more likely people will move to other places within Israel, further away from Gaza, which wouldn't achieve any real purpose for Gaza.
ReplyDeleteOnly 41 countries in the world are self-sufficient in agriculture but 2/3 (of 127 total) are close to self-sufficiency. Israel has too little arable land to be self-sufficient. That makes them like many other countries that have to import food of one type or another. Their economy is otherwise strong. US aid to Israel is military. That need would go away if Arab countries were not a threat. Israel is not an oil producing country, so I'm not sure what you meant about that.
I think the European settler idea is about 100 years out of date. When settlers first came to Israel, it was a colony of Great Britain, not an independent country that those settlers invaded. When the world divested its colonies and most became independent countries, Israel was unique because of opposition by surrounding Arab countries, based largely on religion. Jordan, Syria and Lebanon were also colonies that became nations, but they were not Jewish and thus allowed to develop normally. Calling anyone who moves around within Israel a "settler" strikes me as propagandistic.
“very few people in this country will be inclined to support the killings, and the hostage takings, performed by Hamas last week.”
ReplyDeleteOn the other hand, Israel enjoys vast and militant support in this country. Look at my jackass senator’s (Tom Cotton) recent comments about Gaza. And how my state (Arkansas) passed a law several years ago forbidding the state from doing business with anyone critical of Israel. Also, remember the outrage (or “outrage”) when Ilhan Omar criticized AIPAC. She was accused of being anti-Semitic. I don’t recall Somerby analyzing that flap, but he did quote Andrew Sullivan when he criticized Omar for being “rude” to Elliot Abrams. It was an excuse for Somerby to launch into his usual vast disapproval of all progressives based solely on Omar’s questioning of Abrams.
@2:02 asks "Why did Hamas attack Israel?" Hamas says they want to totally drive the Jews out of Israel and take over their land. That's what "From the river to the sea." Hamas also says they want to kill as many Jews as they can. Why not simply believe them?
ReplyDeleteIt's like the story about the frog and the scorpion. It's their nature. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Scorpion_and_the_Frog
Why does the Republican Party support fascism?
DeleteIt's like the story about the frog and the scorpion. It's their nature. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/The_Scorpion_and_the_Frog
Killing people for no good reason is not anyone's nature. No matter what Somerby says about human nature.
ReplyDeletePalestinians have a right to fight Israeli oppression. They don’t have a right to commit crimes.
ReplyDeleteBut do they have the right to get their land back, the land taken by Europeans in the event called Nakba, in 1948?
DeleteHere is the rest of the info about Nakba in 1948:
Delete"The British terminated the Mandate at midnight at the end of 14 May 1948. On that day, the last remaining British troops and personnel departed the city of Haifa and the Jewish leadership in Palestine declared the establishment of the State of Israel. This was followed the next day by the invasion of Palestine by the surrounding Arab armies and expeditionary forces.
The invasion marked the beginning of the second phase of the war, the 1948 Arab–Israeli War. The Egyptians advanced on the southern coastal strip and were halted near Ashdod; the Jordanian Arab Legion and Iraqi forces captured the central highlands of Palestine. Syria and Lebanon fought several skirmishes with the Israeli forces in the north. The Jewish militias, organised into the Israel Defense Forces, managed to halt the Arab forces. The following months saw fierce fighting between the IDF and the Arab armies, which were being slowly pushed back. The Jordanian and Iraqi armies managed to maintain control over most of the central highlands of Palestine and capture East Jerusalem, including the Old City. Egypt's occupation zone was limited to the Gaza Strip and a small pocket surrounded by Israeli forces at Al-Faluja. In October and December 1948, Israeli forces crossed into Lebanese territory and pushed into Egypt's Sinai Peninsula, encircling the Egyptian forces near Gaza City. The last military activity happened in March 1949, when Israeli forces captured the Negev desert and reached the Red Sea. In 1949, Israel signed separate armistices with Egypt on 24 February, Lebanon on 23 March, Transjordan on 3 April, and Syria on 20 July. During this period the flight and expulsion of the Palestinian Arabs continued.
During the war, around 700,000 Palestinian Arabs were displaced and most of their urban areas were destroyed. Many Palestinian Arabs ended up stateless, displaced either to the Palestinian territories captured by Egypt and Jordan or to the surrounding Arab states; many of them, as well as their descendants, remain stateless and in refugee camps.
In the three years following the war, about 700,000 Jews immigrated to Israel from Europe and Arab lands, with one third of them having left or been expelled from their countries of residence in the Middle East.[23][24][25] These refugees were absorbed into Israel in the One Million Plan."
Quote is from Wikipedia.
DeleteCorby is good-looking.
ReplyDeleteCorby knows about Wikipedia. Corby is adorable.
ReplyDeleteI hope this will be the last comment on Corby.
ReplyDelete