[statecom] Re: Mideast Panel Re: HELP/Convention planning

Mon Aug 21 13:58:09 EDT 2006

Thanks for the history lesson John... how times have changed: now the two state solution is echoed by Condi !

  But as to people being "driven away" from GRP as indicated in an earlier comment:

  We shouldn't confuse disagreements about zionism with the question of attacks on noncombatants.   (people can disagree about Nat Turner's tactics to attack sleeping white civilians as a way to combat slavery ,.. but this should not be confused with having a clear position against slavery) 

  There are "progressives" in the US who are zionists (racists) - that is, people who believe in a the Jewish-priviledge nature of "Israel".  (There even used to be a term called "left zionists" ! - an oxymoron.  Thankfully we don't here that term much anymore especially after the UN declared zionism as racism....)

  Because the GPUS is anti-racist, we have "driven away" some folks because of that.  Although would be concerned that we had "driven away" people who were homophobic.  No, we wouldn't.  And we shouldn't be concerned with driving away zionists (racists). 

  Also, we need to be careful not to let the zionists give us the impression that there is a lot of dissent in the party about palestine.  Witness the crazy Eric Danis who went through great lengths to get al of our emails and create a short-lived ruckus, or witness the other wild zionists at the national level who are willing to debate almost endlessly to protect zionism.

  The zionists are very good at this, from AIPAC on down.  Their strategy is to keep talking and talking and use a voice that is disproportionate to their numbers inside of anti-racist progressive organizations, in order to waste there time essentially and create a false impression of dissent when in fact the percentages of people against zionism in anti-racist organizations is overwhelming (of course).

  Another strategy that the zionists use is to buy out elected officials.  They are also very good at this - witness US congressional votes - no further comment needed !

  A third strategy is to control the discourse in the media about zionism.  They are also very good at this.

  Back to our Panel:

    The question of noncombatants is a separate question and comes after our party's discourse and decision to oppose zionism as indicated in the GRP and GPUS statements.

  I do not recall any persons being driven away because of the noncombatants question.  I do recall one person being driven away who was zionist - personally I wish this person the best but realize that his views are inconsistent with 10KV and so he needed another home.

  My own position on attacks on noncombatants is in some cases explicitly consistent with 10KV, and is the following:

  a) all human deaths as a result of zionism are unfortunate.

  b) people have a right to defend themselves (right to resist in human rights parlance - and explcitly stated in the GRP 10KV on nonviolence).  That means that people have the right to use physical methods to prevent themselves from being attacked.

  c) people should adhere to the Geneva Conventions and not carryout attacks that are either directed at noncombatants or involve a large likelihood of civilian deaths.  This is part of the Geneva Conventions and it is not always clear how it applies in situations where there are societies that are highly militarized - that is societies in which the civilian population is well mixed with soldiers that move in and out of combatant status regularly.  One can debate the extent to which either side in the conflict obeys the Geneva Conventions - it is not always a straightforward analysis.  Still, I oppose attacks on noncombatants on principle and also recognize that people who have less resources are less able to target noncombatants because of a lack of technology.

  d) Nonviolent methods should be tried first and even encouraged.   This is stated explicitly in 10 KV.  No other human population has tried nonviolent resistance for as long and as determined as the Palestiian population.

  Our own GRP statement is consistent with the above 4 points as it says, in point 5 after decrying zionism, environmental disaster, and US aid inteh other 4 points:

  "5. The Green-Rainbow Party of Massachusetts recognizes the right of Palestinians to self-defense as well as nonviolent resistance to Israeli occupation and the Israeli project of forced displacement of the indigenous Palestinian population which has been ongoing since 1948. The right to resist occupation is guaranteed to all peoples of the world by international law."

  I don't see anything wrong with the first sentence and neither did the overwhleming majority of GRP convention goers in 2005,...but I'm all ears.   In the 2nd sentence, the "right to resist" is a technical term since its use comes from the UNDHR (which can be stated explicityly if necessary) and it is understood in international law to be actions which are consistent with the Geneva Conventions, that need not be stated, but can be stated explicitly if necesary.

  Overall I think that statement is fine and any objections to the GRP position are primarily based on other things (the explicit rejection of zionism), and have been initiated by zionist outside of the party who have chosen to interpret point 5 in a very narrow way that most non-zionists will reject.

  None of the folks harassing Colby from outside the party will join the party ! even if we remove statement 5 which I don't think we should do, just to be clear, since the statement is consistent with 10KV and international law.  These folks are zionist racists and there is nothing we can do to get there support.

  We can expect that Grace will be harassed by zionists because of her personal anti-racist position on Palestine - and indeed she has already dealt with some of these folks - in a fashion that I and I think all of us should be proud of. 

  We can also expect not to have support from zionists as we grow our party.

  ron

John Walsh <jvwalshmd at gmail.com> wrote:
  Another point is that Jews do not have a monopoly on racism. In our
1989 effort to put on the ballot in Cambridge a 2-state solution, then
anathema to all "respectable" people and a freeze on any military aid
to Israel used to suppress the first intifada, we were a group of
Jewish Americans, Arab-Americans and Palestinians and a few goyem
like myself. There was only one instance of racism and it was
anti-Jewish racism that came from an Iranian-American. He would not
stop so we threw him out of the group, CPR (Coalition for Palestinian
Rights).
john walsh
p.s. WE WON - despite intense opposition from the entire political
establishment from Joe Kennedy then Congressmann to Michael Dukakis to
Barney Frank to JCRC, etc. We had a shoestring budget but a handful
of hard-working people.

On 8/21/06, Merelice wrote:
> On 8/20/06, annie butler wrote:
> > why wouldn't we listen to palestinians? annie
> >
>
> So far, Annie, the discussions and workshops the GRP has had at its
> conventions have included ONLY Palestinians or the Palestinian
> viewpoint. So we most certainly do listen to Palestinians and several
> of us maintain Palestinian (and in my case also Lebanese and Egyptian)
> connections. Our GRP statement clearly reflects this and is very much
> on the cutting edge of thinking. What it does not strongly reflect is
> the tragedy of death regardless of whose death is involved and the
> need for working creatively toward a nonviolent resolution. Nor do we
> offer any support for those Jews and/or Israelis who have the courage
> to fight Zionism from within. A large segment of our own GRP members
> have been shouted down or chastised (and driven away) for even raising
> these perspectives, which is totally inappropriate for a Party that
> believes in lifting voices and seeking consensus.
>
> Merelice
> _______________________________________________
> StateCom mailing list
> StateCom at green-rainbow.org
> http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/statecom
>
_______________________________________________
StateCom mailing list
StateCom at green-rainbow.org
http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/statecom