Actually we posted this back in the early AM but thought we would bring it to your attention.
Ok this is our last post on this subject as there is plenty of material both on this blog and elsewhere for those who want to actually educate themselves.
First there is this little gem in Cherniak’s original post:
While this singling out of Israel can be called “anti-Zionism”, the reality is that it is no different than anti-Semitism. It is the singling out of Jews (indeed, an entire country of Jews) amongst all the people of the world for condemnation.
Now there is something of a truth here insofar as singling out of any country is biased and when it is a “nominally” Jewish state the question of motives is reasonable. However, it is not a sufficient basis through which to dismiss these criticisms. If Cherniak wants to argue that all states establish themselves on top of the blood and bones of other’s ancestors, especially in their formative years, that is fine. Surely this is equally true of Canada, the US and the rest of the new world. But though rape and murder are part of human history and the human condition we need not accept it.
Moreover there is the more disturbing claim by Cherniak that Israel is made up entirely of Jews (see above quote). Wrong. Israel is made up of about 75% Jews and 25% religious minorities. Remember those Arab towns in Israel that Hezbollah hit? It is interesting and telling that in Cherniak’s racist mind that Jews are the only people in Israel. Or perhaps he is just planning for that day. Sounds ominous, creepy really.
Yet even if it were true that Israel was 100% Jewish it would not be sufficient to make the move that criticism of Israel is anti-Semitic or even anti-Zionist for that matter. This is all so very basic we tire of it. This reductio ad anti-Semitum won’t stick because it is logically incoherent. Try this. Over 60% of Americans are anti-American foriegn policy but we would not call these Americans anti-American (well Fox news would but that hardly helps Cherniak’s argument rather it reveals the extent of his logical dementia).
The next gem from Cherniak comes from his comments section wherein he provides ample proof of just how ignorant he is about anti-Semitism and Racism, their structure and their reproduction thorough time.
Jason Cherniak said… Anti-Semitism is a problem of individuals; not groups. If you want to point out individual anti-Semitic Liberals with power, then I will be happy to oppose their power. However, this idea that there is an unnamed “group” full of hatred is just as racist as anti-Semitism itself.
Anti-Semitism is not a problem of “individuals” in any meaningful sense of the word. Does Jason think that language or ideology or Nazism or Apartheid for that matter is/was wholly a problem of individuals? Only Margaret Thatcher and Chicago economists think that there is no such thing as society. What, however, is equally odd is the last sentence of his post:
However, this idea that there is an unnamed “group” full of hatred is just as racist as anti-Semitism itself.
WTF could this possibly mean? If it is an unnamed group, i.e., no particular ethnic or linguistic character is assigned to it, then how could it be racist to ascribe something to it? Racism is defined as the ascription of general characteristics (usually negative defective, or extreme) to a whole group of people based on their shared belonging to an ethnic or linguistic community. Hence, Cherniak’s concluding sentence is udder gibberish.
This failure to sort through categories and premises and their relationship to one another is the basis of the LSAT. Please tell me that the liberals have more talent than this coming through the ranks. Ezra is proof positive that party’s can survive dim lights but we thought liberals’ had standards; at least for cleverness and a capacity to think. We are starting to prefer Kinsella, at least he knows his logical syllogisms and then proceeds to violate them.