Term "Zionism" Needs toBe Replaced

Anyone who has shows such an inability to write a complete, coherent sentence doesn't deserve to be taken seriously. Needless to say, the "confusion" is your own. But, I'll put that aside and pretend, for a moment, that you actually made some literate argument about the word "Zionism." Assuming that that word has the same connotation as "colonist" or "nazi" is complete fantasy. Zionism is simply the belief in a homeland for Jews, and a majority of Zionists (now and previously) are moderates not extremists. Implying what you have only makes you a hater, and that type of simplistic ignorance assures that you will be immediately dismissed, as you should be.

I could not resist: Alternatives to Zionist are:
S-H-I-T; DRECK (means garbage, and used as we use shit, in German and Yiddish), plus the usual, very appropriate alternatives: Nazi, colonist, lackey of US oil imperialism, capitalist hustler, mentally ill, profoundly stupid, backward peasant...That's tonight's entertainment, folks!

Just remember, all nationalism is reactionary and the only hope to peace in the Middle East is a socialist, secular Palestine. For more on the Zionists, see:
Zionism in the Age of Dictators by Lenni Brenner at:
http://www.marxists.de/middleast/brenner/index.htm
and the Hidden History of Zionism by Ralph Schoenman at:
http://www.marxists.de/middleast/schoenman/

Alternate words of Socialists of course could also be: "Morons, liars, and historically-ignorant pip squeaks."

It seems ironic that so many early Zionists were Socialists.

Of course, don't ask any modern-day Bay Area Socialist to verify this for you. That might actually require them to read a non-biased book.

"national" socialists. Real socialists are internationalists.

Wake up and smell the coffee, Mr. Rizzo. (Any relation to that sleazy guy who Dustin Hoffman played in "Midnight Cowboy"?)

Most people DO associate "Zionist" with "colonist" and "nazi" these days. Most people I know. Guess you only ask your buddies at the synagogue.

At any rate, if your arguement that Zionism just means a home for Jews, then why isn't any place Jews live their home? Obviously the answer is because Zionism means a home for JEWS ONLY.

Obviously, Zionism is racism. Zionism = Jewish Supremacy. Zionism is morphing into Nazism. And there is no doubt about it, Zionism is colonialism, WHICH in case you haven't noticed, is quite out of fashion these days. Quite passe. And it will not last much longer in Palestine-Israel.

Israel is the homeland of the Palestinians too, even more so than Jewish Joe Blow from Brooklyn, New York, and they, the Palestinians, deserve equal rights and self-sovereignty. To deny this classifies YOU as a RACIST.

"Guess you only ask your buddies at the synagogue."

tsk tsk tsk. If the same comment had been made except directed at muslims "Guess you only ask your buddies at the mosque."- there would have been a collective whine that the author of it was soooo prejudice. This is just another of 10 million examples of how lefties do not believe in equal sensitivity towards all people. Perhaps the author of that comment should try and get his head out of his ass and get a grip on reality... but Noooo, guess you only ask your buddies at the protests and teach ins.

"the Palestinians, deserve equal rights and self-sovereignty. "

"secular Palestine"

Does anyone really believe that the above can happen anywhere in the mid-east? Who has self-sovereignty now? Syria? Iran? Iraq? Saudi Arabia? Isreal? And what state is secular? Is a secular state possible in the mid east?

I do not like Isreal and don't back the US support of that state, but I also believe anyone who really thinks Palestine will be a self- governing, secular, truely socialist democracy is foolish. An independent Palestinian State is probably inevitable and rightly so but we should be prepared for it to be another lunatic state.
In PRC many of us hoped for freer Tibet and autonomy for some of our mother dialect groups but most of us had reservations about an independent Urgher State in the far west.

" Who has self-sovereignty now? Syria? Iran? Iraq? Saudi Arabia? Isreal?"

Do they have schools where you live? All the countries you mentioned are sovereign states. Do you know what a sovereign nation is? It would seem not.

===>Most people DO associate "Zionist" with "colonist" and "nazi" these days. Most people I know.

That's where the problem lies. "Most people I know." Most people you know probably believe the way you do about Israel. The overwhelming majority of the rest of your fellow citizens hardly ever think about Zionist, think of the Pilgrims when they hear the word 'colonist', and think of Jew killing Hitler when they hear the word "nazi". A far cry from what you think about when you hear those words because you've been programed to believe America is evil. So go on and make up whatever new term you want to make up because no one relevant is listening to you anyway.

Dear no-name,
Thanks for your nice and polite reply.
Yes, there are schools in China and, since I am now in SF area, there are schools here also.

Regarding your comment. The operative word in self-sovereignty in this context is 'self'. Self is used similiar popular sovereignty' and relates to rule by the will of the people. If I misread this, or mislead you I am sorry.

Do you really believe that these states in the middle east are subject to the wishes and rules of the general public? If you do, and if you are right, then I am even more afraid of the future.

Regarding general sovereignty. Does it really matter if the Assad family runs a country without your say or if the French do the same if you are a simple worker?
If we allow self-sovereignty to simply mean they are not ruled by Europeans then its a silly and meaningless definition. There is no 'self' in the sovereignty these countries enjoy except for the self in selfish (for their rulers)
Mea

I don't see any parallell between PRC's separatist elements and Palestine. There's no comparison, really. For just one massive disconnect, the Palestinians are numerically greater than the Israelis whereas PRC separatists are greatly in the minority.

Secondly, a secular state in the Middle East is certainly possible and indeed even exists. Pakistan, Egypt and Iraq are all secular states. Even Libya is to some degree a fairly secular state. All names which make most Americans writhe in fury, I realize, but that doesn't change the fact they ARE secular.
As for self-sovereign, I'm not sure I quite understand what you mean. If you mean a democracy, this would be truly revolutionary not only for the Middle East but for the world in general. Not even the United States is a democracy (it is a republic). Those very few nations which do claim to be democracies, in that they follow the will of the people, are not truly sovereign. Witness Germany, electing a leader opposed to war in Iraq, is now under incredible pressure from the hegemonic US. This is not true sovereignty.

In any case, a separate Palestinian state is merely cover for an Israeli plan of apartheid, creating homeland partitionary states for ethnics just like South Africa did with their homeland system during apartheid.
Israel/Palestine can indeed become a secular, modern and inclusive nation. Eventually it will have to; the world does not tolerate attempts to make nations 'ethnically pure' any longer.

I really agree with your post above this one. Colonialism is on its way out for good. I must admit I made the comment about "your buddies at the synagogue" to be a bit snide, but also because it seems so true with some of my Jewish friends and acquaintances, many who refuse to take the time to research the truth about Israel's ethnic cleansing of the Palestinians,etc. Actually, the same could be said of many of my Christian friends and acquaintances. It's very frustrating the way many people do not think for themselves, and instead just go with what mainstream media says, or what the rabbi or priest says, because they are too lazy to think for themselves. On top of that, they may be OK with the status quo, and to acknowledge the truth about what is happening to the Palestinians (ethnic cleansing and slow genocide) would require that they take action and perhaps be confrontational. And they are simply too lazy, apathetic, and perhaps intimidated. These kinds of attitudes prolong the misery in the Mid East and will allow acts of terrorism on all sides (even the US! and most definately the terrorist state of Israel!)) to continue unabated.
I am glad I am American, but we the people need to take control, and get involved with causes like campaign reform (http://www.fairelections.us) for 100% publicly funded campaigns (rather than allowing politicians to be bought out by special interest groups like Zionists, and the oil and weapons industry) to reclaim our democracy, as right now we have a plutocracy (ruled by the rich). We can save America and the world. Let's not throw out the baby with the bath water.

=-would require that they take action and perhaps be confrontational.

Oh yeah thats what the anti-war people do best. "Lets take action. Everyone grab your crayons and poster board. I got some staples. Lets make up some signs and march in a circle. Lets be confrontational too. When you walk by the police spit on them and threaten to kill them if they get in our way."

You wanna take action? Go to palestine, pick up a gun and fight along side the palestinians. Wanna be confrontational? Walk up to the IDF and tell them youre gonna blow them to smitherines if they dont back out. That'd take some guts, something ain't none of you got.

typical cartoonish freeper hallucination of reality.

"the Palestinians are numerically greater than the Israelis whereas PRC separatists are greatly in the minority. "

What you are saying No Name,is that its Ok for one group of people to expand their borders? Tibetans were a majority in Tibet. China expanded into Tibet and now Tibetans are a minority in China. If China expanded its border into Palestine (skipping north of India) then the Palestinians would be a tiny minority and I guess that would be OK.

The Urghrs are a bit differant I admit since they may (or may not) have expanded into China.


"Not even the United States is a democracy (it is a republic). Those very few nations which do claim to be democracies, in that they follow the will of the people, are not truly sovereign. "

Are you claiming that there are mid east countries whose freedoms and responsive leadership comes even close to western european or united states standards (however critical one may be of them)? Which state are your refering to? Turkey? Close but even that country is would be out on the fringe.

Your argument sounds a bit like making a (true) statement that no man is 100% good and thereby linking John Wayne Garcy and your mother.

Perhaps I should word my point in very simple language for you -- every country in the mid east is a mess. I don't have much hope for an independent Palestine to be differant. Perhaps the progress towards a Palesinian State is far enough along we should look at the question of if and if so how, that state can be progressive.

Let me also state, that these arguments don't necessarily argue for or against a seperate Palestinian State. The situation now is simply reality. If the conditions are intolerable, they should change. What they change into then becomes reality. The odds are that it would become another mess. Wishing or preaching otherwise doesn't change a thing. You can wish that Isrealis and Palestinians can be one state and they can then live happily together for a great and glorious socialist east (opps, drop the 'east', just thinking of my boyhood Young Pioneer days) but what evidence do you have that this will happen? I don't think it will given the present situation and most conceivable future ones. So we should ask "what then should we do".

One thing that is in Palestine's favor is that, outside of Isreal, the population is pretty homogenious (I thinkn - may be wrong here)- most of the Christians have left as have most minorities so the possiblity of problems like Turk - Kurd; Persian - Iraqi, Sunni - Shitite, Egyptian - Coptic, Arab Sudanes - African Sudanes, etc is small. I'm assuming of course that the Isreali squatters have moved on.

As I said, and I think you should recognize. A Palestinian State will face challenges. You may hope what you want but they won't all come together and live like christians (I know, I stole the last comment from someone else)

"What you are saying No Name,is that its Ok for one group of people to expand their borders?"

No, that's a blatant attempt to twist the meaning of my words. All I said was that PRC separatists and Palestinians are not comparable elements. I did not say comment whatsoever on the validity of PRC separatist movements.

" every country in the mid east is a mess."

It hasn't always been that way. Who gave us law, writing, the wheel, the number zero, astronomy, alot of engineering, etc etc etc. Europe has only very recently, in overall history, pulled into the lead. For a very long time, the Middle East was much more civilized. You presume to think that history is over. The Romans thought so too.

" You can wish that Isrealis and Palestinians can be one state and they can then live happily together for a great and glorious socialist east"
Who said anything about socialism?

" I'm assuming of course that the Isreali squatters have moved on."

actually Israeli settlements have expanded, and continue to expand, in the occupied territories. Under a separate Palestinian state these people are in danger, or else, the separate state is scattered and really not sovereign but under the control of Israel.


" they won't all come together and live like christians"

ever hear of Northern Ireland? Christians can blow each other up and hurl bombs and rocks and bullets at each other, too. In fact most Christian nations today were like that at one point. France, Germany, England, Scotland - they've all had religious wars between Catholic and Protestant with thousands upon thousands killed. They got over it. It takes time, but it's hardly credible to say its impossible.

At the risk of driving this to silliness (but bored at work as I am)

>>> All I said was that PRC separatists and "Palestinians are not comparable elements. I did not say comment whatsoever on the validity of PRC separatist movements.

---no, that's not all you said, you said "the Palestinians are numerically greater than the Israelis whereas PRC separatists are greatly in the minority." If that is what you meant, than that is a silly statement. The seperatists are in a minority because a billion person country annexed them. They are a majority where they live.



>>>>It hasn't always been that way. Who...
Who cares what they were hundreds of years or ever decades ago. What are they now? Guess what, they have to live today, not in medival Bagdad or occupied Toledo.

>>>" You can wish that Isrealis and Palestinians can be one state and they can then live happily together for a great and glorious socialist east"
Who said anything about socialism?
---- I don't think you did, although it was mentioned in this thread. I was just reliving my past.


>>>>actually Israeli settlements have expanded, and continue to expand, in the occupied territories. Under a separate Palestinian state these people are in danger, or else, the separate state is scattered and really not sovereign but under the control of Israel.
---- you have hit on a strong point that I was making. SInce the squatters could not be wished away as I tried (and the other problems can't be wished away as you have tried) there is a good chance for trouble.


>>>ever hear of Northern Ireland? Christians can blow each other up and hurl bombs and rocks and bullets at each other, too. In ...
--- The Christian statement was labelled as not to be taken seriously. It was copying a joke someone famously said (can't recall who). As a side note, Irish Christians are not blowing each other up. the IRA are avowed and fervent anti clerical athesists. The athesit and the CHristians are blowing each other up.

If the Jews don't get with the program-and soon!-you're damn right there'll be another Nazi-style Holocaust against them-and not a moment too soon! Perhaps Hitler really had a point about these subhumans after all. They had better clean up their act in Palestine-and everywhere else!-or this next "Holocaust" will make the last one look like a tea party. And it will be a fate they truly deserve!

Get you and your anarchist views and take them somewhere else.

"the IRA are avowed and fervent anti clerical athesists. "

err. no. there are atheist elements, but they represent the Catholic community and some of the more famous incidents have actually involved members of the Catholic clergy. On the other hand, I'm not sure how pious the Protestant Loyalist paramilitary drug dealers are, having long ago abandoned any semblance of political aspirations for a wholly criminal structure and aim.

My analogy to history merely indicates that the situation changes, therefore, hope for some different social model in the ME is not impossible, as you so fervently insist. History isn't over. I'm not saying that because of history that anything predictable will happen, all I'm saying is that your statement that they have all always been corrupt, uncivilized regimes is a false stereotype which only takes a select portion of recent history into account.

As for the numerics of the situation .... all I'm saying is that it is incomparable to the situation in China. I'm saying that it would be a completely different situation were China to invade Palestine, and it would be. The issues would be wholly fundamentally different. I'm not saying one is worse or better, they are both bad, but certainly .. you must admit .. its a pretty bad comparison. I can think of many much better ones, i.e. South Africa or Indonesia or numerous other modern examples that have occurred. Size certainly has alot to do with the nature of the situation. China's occupation can more closely be compared to Soviet satellite nations during the Cold War than they can to neo-colonialist occupations such as Palestine.

There is an enormous chance for trouble unless there is a fundamental change in that society. Now you can believe 2 things here: either those people are racially incapable of change, or they are capable. There is no middle ground, no ifs ands or buts on the issue. And the only kind of change that would really help is a united, secular society in a single state that works through its differences enough to live side by side.

It will likely take an outside threat to achieve such a unification.

It is so annoying when Zionists use another author's name and then write something totally obnoxious and racist pretending to be someone else.

This seems to be something Zionists really take pleasure in. Of course, they do it to try to discredit honest discussion. It's an obviously despartate and devious way of communicating, when they are threatened by the truth about racist Zionism and the apartheid, terrorist country of Israel.

So "piss off" you Zionist cyber terrorists! Bunch of twits.

I think our views are converging.

>>>It will likely take an outside threat to achieve such a unification.
--- This is the type of comment I think has to be discussed (may or may not be the answer). People need to talk about what comes next. This isn't like Czech and Slovokia splitting.


On an issue with no real relationship to the centeral thread, the IRA attempts to represent the Catholic community but that community is more ethnicaly defined as 'catholic' as religiously defined. The IRA does not pretend to kill for the Blessed Mother. As I understand things the little that's left of the IRA today (although basically gangsters at this stage) are anti clerical. The last famous clerics I recall in the IRA were during the civil war period, although I could be wrong here. None the less I think it is safe to say that the IRA are not Catholic in the same way Al Quada is Islamic or even as Isreal is Jewish (given the strength of the jewish fundimentalists in that country).
The IRA if it has any international dreams sees itself as pan-Celtic or pan-labor, not pan-Catholic.

true, that about the IRA, although clerical members have been involved in major attacks in very recent times (it has just come out that one priest was involved in the famous Omagh bombings in retaliation for Bloody Sunday back in '72). But you're right, they are to some degree anti-clerical and more pan-Celtic than pan-Catholic.

One thing I must correct you on, though, is that the IRA is no longer reponsible for most of the violence; nowadays this is mostly Protestant paramilitaries. Right now there is a power struggle within the paramilitaries which is likely the largest source of violence in the area and it is Protestant vs. Protestant. We don't hear much about it because it is probably not simple enough for the evening news.

As for an outside threat .. you think this is really unlikely in the next 50 years?

Put it this way. The Pentagon (and Jane's Defence, for that matter) assume U.S. military superiority for a period of 35 years from now. Then, .... well I'll let you guess who they expect to overtake the US. So you can see that an outside threat to, well, alot of the world really isn't all that far off. And no, it isn't Iraq (lol).