The lesson you should learn from Noam disappointing you is not to idolize intellectuals.
Norm isn’t a pedophile but he’s transphobic and kind of a crank. He’s expressed distaste for BDS on the grounds that BDS doesn’t strictly endorse Israel’s right to exist. He still denounces ‘political correctness’ which is kind of endearing because it means he’s not online enough to know it’s called woke now. He basically wrote a whole book lamenting how idpol and DEI are ruining everything.
He’s expressed distaste for BDS on the grounds that BDS doesn’t strictly endorse Israel’s right to exist
As in he thinks Isntrael DOES have a right to exist??
Yes. He has explained his reasoning as being based on upholding international law insofar as it holds Israel accountable for its crimes but also with the right that it grants Israel to exist. He then criticizes BDS for having their cake and eating it too, since some leaders in BDS have said that they don’t want Israel to exist anymore, while BDS generally upholds international law to justify their criticism of Israel.
AFAIK his criticism of BDS wasn’t that they rejected Israel per se, but rather that they upheld one aspect of international law but not the other. I disagree because I think international law is already largely worthless, but I think it was “if you lean on the law that says X, you have to accept that the same law says Y”, rather than “Israel has a right to exist and I don’t like that you’re undermining it”. I could be misremembering this, though.
Yeah that’s exactly what I mean, but the sticking point is that applying his rule means anyone who says “Israel should stop existing and Palestine should be the only state in that territory” is out of line. Sure, it’s because of his respect for international law (which is what makes his work as an academic rock solid) but it’s still a rule that is incompatible with the realities of imperialism.
is that applying his rule means anyone who says “Israel should stop existing and Palestine should be the only state in that territory” is out of line
I think his point is that it’s out of line if the same person also calls for respect of international law, because that’s an inconsistent position (international law supports Israel’s right to exist, so calling to respect it means also calling for that). As I said before, I think international law is already worthless, but I see the logic of the argument even if I disagree with it. I might have been misremembering his position, though.
He’s also talked about making several mistakes, I wonder if he ranks that as one of them
Where has he talked about this? I’m curious how much accountability he’s taken
He alluded to it on TrueAnon like 3 years ago. Basically lamenting he lost faith in the Palestinian cause for a while, feeling like people could not be made to care about their brutalization, and regretted advocating for nonviolence because the March of Return was a failure. I can’t recall if he mentioned BDS. I don’t have sources.
I don’t know how much accountability he has taken. I have a lot of respect for Finkelstein, but the man does have serious blind spots.
Yes he gave up on Palestine after the great march of return, I was wondering if there was any other reflection. Thank you!
Yes he is a Zionist, just a different type that knows it has to resolve the Palestinian question for israel to continue. Notice the dismissive language towards resistance fighters
https://www.theguardian.com/world/2008/may/26/israelandthepalestinians.usa
He is not a Zionist, please see: https://wheredowestand.org/normanfinkelstein/
Anarchist by ideology, Zionist by solution. Probably a bad idea to link an article where he claims there’s no apartheid in israel, that right of return isn’t possible, etc if you’re trying to convince the reader he isn’t in favor of the existence of Israel (even as a practical matter). In that very article he says he can’t support bds because they don’t acknowledge Israel’s “right to self determination.” I am glad all his arguments are compiled in one place, so much appreciated
It’s possible you are both arguing over opinions that Finkelstein no longer holds here.
The article you linked is from 2008, while the introduction to the piece @TheBroodian@hexbear.net linked to ends with “His forthcoming book is Gaza: An Inquest into Its Martyrdom (University of California Press)”, and that book was apparently published in January 2018 meaning the piece is at least about a decade old at this point.
Here’s a more recent article, where he speaks on his choice to tone police “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” at the Columbia encampment (plus a nod to cancel culture at the end)
https://www.theguardian.com/us-news/article/2024/may/17/university-protests-gaza-norman-finkelstein
If you’ve heard him posit contrary opinions, please post them. As far as I’ve seen, he has not engaged in self crit.
I have no idea, just pointing out that neither of you contributed anything recent.
deleted by creator
Removed by mod
It just should have been carved out of Germany.
If we mean in reference to refugees of the Holocaust needing a place to live, then no, the countries from which they fled should have been forced at gunpoint to readmit anyone who wanted to return, making appropriate provisions for them as anyone else for homes lost in the war and such. This idea of a refugee Jewish population that needs to all be dumped somewhere is tacitly accepting senseless, monstrous policies on the part of a number of states.
a whole bunch (heap?) of zionism just yes-ands european antisemitism. “you’re absolutely right, mr. gentile, we cannot be part of your nation”.
It just should have been carved out of Germany.
, all settler colonies are bad, no matter where! i fucking hate this zionist apologia western “leftists” constantly and inevitably fall into, leading to such verbal diarrhoea like yours trying to find “good” places for colonialism and land theft. those places dont exist!! zionism, as well as all other settler-colonial ideologies must be completely annihilated and their identity and “culture” permanently wiped off the face of the earth. please read something different than a fucking picture book for once in your life and educate yourself on the soviet (aka the peoples’ who suffered the most under fascism) approach to the german national question.also, i can fucking guarantee you that romani and sorbian people would have suffered much more from the inevitable zionist genocide that you would have been so eager to endorse than any germoid.
the soviet approach to the German national question
To what are you referring, please?
indeed. but i also meant molotovs statements on the developments at the time (sorry for suboptimal source, english-language ones are few and far between) the 1952 peace note, the 1955 treaty between the ussr and the gdr, and just the broader soviet policy theme after the war emphasizing that the german people and german culture were distinct from nazism, and that soviet policy on the ground should not be intended solely as punitive toward all things german.
Removed by mod
i’m propably doing a mistake by even dignifying this rubbish by a response, but fuck it.
why are westerners always clinging to this disgusting zionist narrative that jews are special little gems whose suffering and oppression is worth more than anyone elses? why do you people always portray the anti-jewish portion of the nazi genocide, despite it not even constituting the majority of the hitlerites crimes as an evil in its own league?
why dont the slavic or romani victims or the political prisoners who suffered the same or even worse abuses in the same camps by the same fascist parasites get to feature in your In your typically western delusions of grandeur about how to change the ethnic and religious makeup of an entire region (about which you clearly dont know shit!) to suit your preferences? and even if we were to to ignore all the other highly problematic shit about your idea, like the fact that most isreali settlers arent and werent holocaust survivors (in fact, nazi victims in “israel” had to suffer frankly disgusting discrimination for being “weak”), it still wouldnt be their fucking land! hell, even if you are enough of a freak to not oppose settler colonialism on principle and think that for example the german population would “deserve it” (which you wouldnt if you were to familiarize yourself with the soviet approach to the whole situation), youd have to keep in mind that virtually all german territory east of the elbe/labe/łobjo was stolen through settler colonialism from its original slavic inhabitants. as i stated before, romani and sorbian people would have suffered much more from the inevitable zionist genocide that you would have been so eager to endorse than any germoid! but hey, apparently them not being jews makes them “unworthy” and
subhu-victims of the holocaust.given your username, im assuming youre a yankee. so could you imagine an african american seing the the horrors of white settlerism and thinking “the only problem with this is that im not on top, fuck indiginous people”? of course not, that would be ridiculous! so please dont make an ass out of yourself, youre smarter than this.
And hey look at that, I managed to write all that without attacking your character, asshole.
my genuine congrats on not breaking decorum, i know how important that stuff is to you libs.
Why do you think that? Should descendants of slavery get ethnostates carved out of their captors or do you think anti Jewish bigotry is special?
my understanding is that separatism isn’t very popular anymore but if the Republic of New Afrika wants to work it out with the relevant indigenous people i can think of worse ways for the US to balkanize.
Giving ethnostates to oppressed people is how you get israel. The fact that I said ethnostates and you started hypothesizing a decolonized America is worrying
i did say it’s not popular anymore. For that matter, is it an ethnostae if BIPOC kick white people out? Was it an ethnostate when Vietnam made the french leave?
The worse ways involve Greater Idaho and a restored Confederacy.
Of course not. Hence why it’s odd to bring up when discussing ethnostates
Should descendants of slavery get ethnostates carved out of their captors
Sovereignty isn’t ethnostates
I mean, it’s not like Anglos are making good use of most of it, the south in particular. Hell, black labor built up much of the US, no reason not to get something for it. Alabama alone is like 20 people away from a solid black majority. Like someone else said, it should just be worked out with indigenous peoples.
Decolonization does not mean putting ethnostates in place of colonial states. Yes it is ultimately up to the colonized
Of course! Thank you for the clarification. Tis just a meme.
unless you’re trans
Or a Palestinian after they aren’t freed by peaceful marching
I mean Finkelstein literally said that Chomsky was one of his most important mentors
I really hope hes taking this news well
Norm loves and idolizes Chomsky, doesn’t he? He hung out with him regularly. I saw him talk about that not long ago.
This is true but there’s a lot of things I would criticize Norm for before that. If knew Noam was so close to Epstein he wouldn’t have acted that way, that much is clear from how Norm acted towards Epstein and Dershowitz.
Norm Chomsky
all my homies hate ifunny
