Two Comments on Simon Schama’s essay ‘The left’s problem with Jews has a long and miserable history’

I am going to re-post a comment that I tweeted to Mr. Schama on February 21, 2016 via TwitLonger:

Link to Schama’s Financial Times essay:

Just the latest on the pressing question of ‘Jewish Money’:
A link available to subscribers of W.S.J.:
A link to Occupy Democrats that reports on the W.S.J. news story:
My comment is in response to your hysterical diatribe against B.D.S. in The Financial Times:
‘Jew hatred’ is the response of that notorious hybrid creature Antisemite/Self-hating Jew, constructed by Zionist apologists/propagandists like yourself, and accepted as the Party Line by your allies at A.I.P.A.C.,Sheldon Adelson and the Bronfman’s Sr. & Jr. Who would have thought, that this report would have come from the utterly dependable defender of Zionist settler colonialism The Wall Street Journal?
Karl Kraus’ Ghost

I also posted this comment, as it was, to the Financial Times as a reply to the Schama essay, and after a few hours it was removed.What I meant to indicate by my use of rhetorical binary of Antisemite/Self-hating Jew was that a politically rational critique of Israel and Zionism is an impossibility: given that this hybrid makes any critique impossible, as the critique is the product of a prima facie prejudiced source.  Any critique is immediately identified as either one or the other. The practice of nuance is antithetical to political apologetics as practiced, but call by its rightful name propaganda.

Here is my subsequent comment to my first,that I hoped would clarify and add depth to my first attempt:

From the Occupy Democrats essay:
‘You may remember the ridiculous doomsday prophecies and outrageous fear-mongering that defined the Republican campaign against President Obama’s nuclear peace deal with Iran. The motivation behind their unwise and ultimately ineffective resistance to the President’s diplomatic agenda has finally come to light. A new report from the Wall Street Journal reveals that NSA wiretaps found that the the Israeli Prime Minister and other officials of the Israeli governments attempted to, and most likely succeeded, to bribe American legislators in exchange for their support against the deal. “A U.S. intelligence official familiar with the intercepts said Israel’s pitch to undecided lawmakers often included such questions as: “How can we get your vote? What’s it going to take? Mr. Netanyahu and some of his allies voiced confidence they could win enough votes.” The answers to Israeli proposals have yet to be fully revealed, but it is clear that favors were offered – bribes were proposed – and from the subsequent behavior of Republican lawmakers, we can only infer that our legislators accepted those bribes, from a foreign government in exchange for opposing the diplomatic efforts of the Obama Administration. At the very least, the very discussion itself indicates that they conspired with a foreign government to undermine the foreign policy agenda of their elected Commander-in-Chief, which certainly amounts to treason.’


About stephenkmacksd

Rootless cosmopolitan,down at heels intellectual;would be writer. 'Polemic is a discourse of conflict, whose effect depends on a delicate balance between the requirements of truth and the enticements of anger, the duty to argue and the zest to inflame. Its rhetoric allows, even enforces, a certain figurative licence. Like epitaphs in Johnson’s adage, it is not under oath.'
This entry was posted in Uncategorized. Bookmark the permalink.

Leave a Reply

Fill in your details below or click an icon to log in: Logo

You are commenting using your account. Log Out /  Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out /  Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out /  Change )

Connecting to %s

This site uses Akismet to reduce spam. Learn how your comment data is processed.