A critical review of the SWP pamphlet "Socialists and the Fight Against Anti-Semitism: An Answer to the B´Nai B´Rith Anti-Defamation League". It reflects a "Zionist" turn in my thinking. First posted in 2011.
This old pamphlet was published by the U.S. Socialist Workers Party in 1973
in response to charges by the ADL that the SWP, their youth group YSA and other
left-wing groups were anti-Semitic, and that anti-Zionism is actually a form of
anti-Semitism. I'm not a big friend of the ADL, but SWP's response is
unconvincing. I don't doubt that the SWP is opposed to anti-Semitism, but their
explicit (!) call to destroy the State of Israel is objectively anti-Semitic,
whether they think so or not. The State of Israel, after all, is the really
existing Jewish state and the only Jewish state.
Many socialists of different persuasions opposed Zionism during the 1930's, instead demanding that Jews be given full rights in the Western nations. The SWP conducted a vigorous campaign to open the borders of the United States to Jews fleeing Nazi terror, a campaign the ADL opposed for fear of alienating Roosevelt. Naturally, the SWP points this out in their pamphlet, half of which is devoted to SWP's defense of Jews during the 1930's and 1940's. But the political situation changed in the aftermath of World War II. When the "world socialist revolution" failed to materialize, the only way to save the Jews from further holocausts was to create a Jewish state - something the Zionists were already doing in Palestine. Rather than calling for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (the only sensible solution), the SWP demands the destruction of Israel. Try imagine the implications of *that* circa 1948!
SWP compares the PLO to the ANC, but this is unconvincing. The ANC explicitly stated in the Freedom Charter that South Africa belongs to all who live there, and have always sought and welcomed White support. The PLO states in its national charter that the Jews should be driven into the sea. They might not put it in those very words, but that's the obvious meaning of their program. PLO groups have indiscriminately targeted civilian Israelis, both in Israel and abroad. The ANC didn't kill South African rugby players abroad or hijacked South African airplanes! Yet, the SWP wants to believe that "democratic secular Palestine" actually means a multi-ethnic/bi-national state for both Jews and Arabs, even calling on the Israelis to join with the Palestinians in destroying their own state (!).
SWP's arguments are not new or unique. In fact, they are the standard arguments of most anti-Zionist left-wing groups. First, point out that socialists were pro-Jewish during the interwar years, while the Zionists sought deals with the "imperialist" governments. Next, claim that the Zionists therefore don't represent the true interest of the Jews. Third, conclude that therefore anti-Zionism cannot be anti-Semitic. In fact, the smashing of the State of Israel is in some strange way in the Jews' best interests! Top it all off by claiming that the PLO actually fights for some kind of bi-national state. QED.
The main difference between the SWP's pamphlet and other material of a similar kind, is that the SWP attempts to put forward their case in a relatively honest manner, without the vulgar exaggerations that sooner or later tend to creep into this kind of discourse ("Zionists were pro-Nazi", etc). In that sense, it could be recommended as the cleanest case made for the anti-Zionist position.
But convincing it is not. I use to have this position myself, quite sincerely I might ad. I eventually managed to talk myself out of it. If the rest of the left can be talked out of it, still remains to be seen...
Many socialists of different persuasions opposed Zionism during the 1930's, instead demanding that Jews be given full rights in the Western nations. The SWP conducted a vigorous campaign to open the borders of the United States to Jews fleeing Nazi terror, a campaign the ADL opposed for fear of alienating Roosevelt. Naturally, the SWP points this out in their pamphlet, half of which is devoted to SWP's defense of Jews during the 1930's and 1940's. But the political situation changed in the aftermath of World War II. When the "world socialist revolution" failed to materialize, the only way to save the Jews from further holocausts was to create a Jewish state - something the Zionists were already doing in Palestine. Rather than calling for a two-state solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict (the only sensible solution), the SWP demands the destruction of Israel. Try imagine the implications of *that* circa 1948!
SWP compares the PLO to the ANC, but this is unconvincing. The ANC explicitly stated in the Freedom Charter that South Africa belongs to all who live there, and have always sought and welcomed White support. The PLO states in its national charter that the Jews should be driven into the sea. They might not put it in those very words, but that's the obvious meaning of their program. PLO groups have indiscriminately targeted civilian Israelis, both in Israel and abroad. The ANC didn't kill South African rugby players abroad or hijacked South African airplanes! Yet, the SWP wants to believe that "democratic secular Palestine" actually means a multi-ethnic/bi-national state for both Jews and Arabs, even calling on the Israelis to join with the Palestinians in destroying their own state (!).
SWP's arguments are not new or unique. In fact, they are the standard arguments of most anti-Zionist left-wing groups. First, point out that socialists were pro-Jewish during the interwar years, while the Zionists sought deals with the "imperialist" governments. Next, claim that the Zionists therefore don't represent the true interest of the Jews. Third, conclude that therefore anti-Zionism cannot be anti-Semitic. In fact, the smashing of the State of Israel is in some strange way in the Jews' best interests! Top it all off by claiming that the PLO actually fights for some kind of bi-national state. QED.
The main difference between the SWP's pamphlet and other material of a similar kind, is that the SWP attempts to put forward their case in a relatively honest manner, without the vulgar exaggerations that sooner or later tend to creep into this kind of discourse ("Zionists were pro-Nazi", etc). In that sense, it could be recommended as the cleanest case made for the anti-Zionist position.
But convincing it is not. I use to have this position myself, quite sincerely I might ad. I eventually managed to talk myself out of it. If the rest of the left can be talked out of it, still remains to be seen...
No comments:
Post a Comment