- International Jewish Solidarity Network: Resisting Zionism
- The 11th Commandment: International Jewish Resistance to Zionism
- Jewish Anti-Zionist Congress (maybe followed by subtitle that references international nature of network)
- Parting the Sea (maybe followed by descriptive subtitle)
- Eyes Wide Open (maybe followed by descriptive subtitle)
- The Pomegranite (maybe followed by descriptive subtitle)
- A Key Challenge (maybe followed by descriptive subtitle)
- Out of Bondage (maybe followed by descriptive subtitle)
- Jewish Solidarity Network: The Anti-Zionist International
- Jewish Resistance Congress: International Challenge to Zionism
Saturday, August 2, 2008
New and refined ideas for the name
We will vote on these tomorrow. What do you think?
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
2 comments:
Hi folks-
This is Aurora Levins Morales. It's exciting hearing tidbits of what you're up to from Ricardo. I have some thoughts/question about the phrase "anti-Zionist." I think there are pros and cons to using it as a self-definition and want to lay out what I see as some of them.
On the plus side, it's unequivocal--it's a clear statement that we are not even a little bit willing to justify or excuse the oppression of Palestinian people by the State of Israel. It's important to hold that position in a clear and easily understood way, recognizable to everyone who learns of us.
Although I general prefer names that say what we're for rather than what we're against, it can be very effective when the group that says it's against something is a group that's expected to be for it. For example, Viet Nam Veterans Against the War was much more powerful than Viet Nam Veterans for Peace would have been.
Saying we are anti-Zionist sets us apart from most of the other folks out there. We present a different option and become a point of reference people can react to, argue with, be shaken up by. It will intensify the inner conflicts of people who are ambivalent, which can make interesting thing happen. It's an uncompromising position of integrity--we are 100% against this.
Symbolic names have some advantages, but they don't immediately let people know what we're about. We have to build a reputation. If we can do that quickly, good. But having the punchiest part of our position right up front in the name gets the ball rolling quickly.
My main concern is with the definition of the target. What we're trying to end is an increasingly violent form of colonialism perpetrated by primarily European Jewish settlers (in the general sense of the word, not referring to the settlements,) upon the Palestinian people, with heavily racist and anti-Islamic content.
Zionism is a form of nationalism. Like many nationalist movements it's expressed itself all along the political spectrum. The right wing end of Zionism has dominated for a long time, and we're against it because it's an ideology of oppression. But ending the oppression is our real goal-- seeing to it that this ideology ceases to have state and military power to inflict harm.
It seems to me that in identifying the problem we're organizing ourselves to fix as Zionism, we're falling in with the notion that there's something exceptional about Jewish colonialism. That Israel is a special case, to be treated differently than other oppressive regimes, struggled against in some unique way that's distinct from other anti-imperialist struggles.
The "special case" idea has been used to say that Israeli colonialism is either better or worse than other forms. Zionists say it's better, either divinely ordained or essential for survival or both. And there is a kind of anti-Semitism that gets tangled up with opposition to Israeli oppression of Palestinians, that sees Israel as uniquely bad among oppressive regimes, in some specifically Jewish way.
I don't think it serves us to go along with any aspect of "special case" thinking. I think if we say our target is Zionism, we risk doing that. The fact that the oppression is being perpetrated by people who were targeted with genocide within living memory presents us with some organizing challenges, but doesn't change the fact that this is an anti-colonial struggle. It's not "special colonialism." It's just entrenched, violent, and bound up in powerful survival related emotions that make it hard for many Jews to think clearly about it. But it's not some special Jewish brand of oppressiveness, and Zionism is just right wing nationalism.
Because there is so much confusion about that fact, so much disinformation about what it is that we're dealing with, I think making this point clear in how we identify ourselves is a powerful political move. We're Jews against colonialism. We're against it when it's done by Jews and when it's done by non-Jews. Right now we're organizing against a Jewish run colonial project.
When we say we're anti-Zionist we're saying we reject the ideology that justifies the colonialism--but saying we won't tolerate and intend to dismantle the oppression itself seems clearer and more direct.
That said, I do see the value in strongly disassociating ourselves from the ideology that not only upholds the colonial project, but is widely promoted as THE unifying mission of Jews everywhere.
What I wonder is if there's a way to do that that keeps the focus on ending the oppression rather than on opposing the justifying story that Zionism tells. We will need to take on that story, but it's a strategic necessity, not our ultimate goal.
It's a pleasure to be in the presence, by word of mouth and the wonders of blogging, of so many smart, creative, courageous, committed and bold thinkers. I'm jazzed to be even a little bit part of it.
Aurora
PS. I didn't talk about how the racism of Israeli colonialism impacts Mizrachi Jews and other people besides Palestinians. I'm excited to see this issue built in from the start.
Post a Comment