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

[Ron Francis]

It is clear that our statement will generate resistance in many quarters.  It definitely will.  There is no doubt of that.  When Chuck Turner mentioned human rights for Palestinians even in the mildest fashion (one sentence about the need for civil rights as human rights for Palestinians), at a public demo, he drew "resistance" for about a week, but he did it and we should be proud of him, because it is consistent with his values and 10KV.
   
  Our statement will generate resistance in a society that is inculcated with zionist thought, mainly through mainstream media.    That is unavoidable. 
   
  That does not make it a bad statement.
   
  That does not make it an unclear statement.
   
  If we remain anti-racist, there is nothing at all that we can do to avoid "resistance" in many quarters in the US, as many people in the country harbor hard zionist attitudes due to years of training:  "Israel is our 'ally'  ".  "Arabs are fanatical terrorists." , "They hate us".   Movies like "munich".  Each of our presidents' statements.
   
  We live in a country where 1000s of Arabs were rounded up and tossed out of the country post 9-11 and there was and still is essentially zero response from the population.  I don't think I need to continue about the deep, deep, deep level of anti-arab racism in our country.
   
  There was a time when talking about ending slavery would engender resistance.  There was a time when talking about voting rights for women would engender resistance.   
   
  We are in a time period now, when talking about equal marriage engenders resistance.   
   
  And we are in a time period in history where being anti-racist against zionism will engender resistance no matter how we play with the words.
   
  It never hurts to make a statement clearer (I support that of course), but let's not kid ourselves:  As long as we support Palestinians as equal human beings, that will bring 90% of the "resistance" that you speak of and invite massive opposition to our candidates due to the disproportionate influence of the pro-apartheid lobby.
   
  The zionists are strong enough to even try to infiltrate our own national party.  And that had nothing to do with the "clarity" of the GPUS statement.  It has to do with racism.  (and the "resistance" came from people in the party,... some of whom claim to be nonzionist)
   
  ron

Merelice <merelice at gmail.com> wrote:
  Ron,
I don't believe you are hearing me or other GRP members, including our
candidates, who have shared their concerns with me and sometimes with these
lists. All of them are quite realistic about the resistance our position
will engender in some places and with some people.

We are not talking about offending or driving away Zionists. And for you to
reply and equate our concerns with those of Zionists is unfair. Some of us
worked on and approved the GRP statement, and we still think there is
something to add to reflect the Party's Key Values more accurately.

Merelice



On 8/21/06, Ron Francis wrote:
>
> ....
> 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".....
_______________________________________________
StateCom mailing list
StateCom at green-rainbow.org
http://www.green-rainbow.org/mailman/listinfo/statecom