[statecom] Proposal to Convention Tomorrow: A Proposal to Revise, Expand, and Improve the Green-Rainbow Party Statement on Palestine

[Colby E. Peterson]

Hello,

And thank you Ron for beginning the conversation. I share all of your  
concerns about modern Israel and the Zionist project. I did not write  
section 4 to legitimize either of those things or what they  
represent. I know you feel very strongly about this issue, and I now  
see how it could be misconstrued as racist. What I did write it for  
was to extend a level of balance and equal-opportunity for everyone  
or anyone to immigrate to the region... BUT- only after the apartheid  
system is abolished and the migration takes place within the legal  
and legitimate parameters established by the democratic government-  
so the land can be shared by all who have ties to it.

I hope you can accept that as reasonable. I would consider it a  
friendly amendment.

- Colby

On Sep 16, 2006, at 12:20 AM, Ron Francis wrote:

> Dear All,
>
>   I appreciate the effort to clarify statements of course, but Item  
> 4 is unacceptable and racist.
>
>   Item 4 is:
>   4. The Green-Rainbow Party also recognizes the historical
> significance of the region of Palestine and Israel for many different
> people, and supports initiatives for Jews, as well as other cultures
> originating in the region, to return to the region provided that
> these initiatives do not infringe nor supersede in any way on the
> rights of others.
>
>   Acknowledgement of the zionist project called "Israel" is  
> accepting zionism - that which we so clearly oppose in part 5 of  
> the statement.
>
>   What we need to understand is that the creating of modern  
> "Israel" (which is how the term is used) represents and is  
> equivalent to the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.
>
>   What we need to do is state that we support democracy and  
> equality for all people in the region and explicitly reject the  
> legalized discrimination found only in Israel.  Remember that is is  
> not the presence of Jewish peolple in the region that concerns  
> Palestinians, it is the imposition of Jewish privilege in the  
> region and the denial of basic human rights for Palestinians.   
> (Also note that historically there were good relations between Jews  
> and Arabs and today there still are in many places in the region)
>
>   In many ways the situation has parallels to Native American  
> struggle.  What native object to is not "European white", they  
> objected to colonization and domination of thier people and culture.
>
>   (By the way, what make "Israel" different from many other  
> countries with racism, is that the racism in "Israel" is  
> legalized.  You cannot go to an Israeli court and hope to get  
> justice if you are a Palestinian because the laws themselves are  
> racist.)
>
>   We might as well say that we recognized the historical  
> significance of the Africaner interests and presence in the region  
> and support the rights of the Africaners to settle in South  
> Africa.  We don't need to do this and is way too close, if not in  
> fact, supporting colonial settlerism especially when the influx of  
> many Jewish people is used to occupy more and more land that is  
> strictly reserved for Jews only.  It is virtually impossible to  
> support the influx of any people (of any bacground) in Palestine  
> without trampling on the return rights of 5 million Palestinians in  
> the world.
>
>   If someone came to your house, forcibly ethnically cleansed it of  
> you as a Non-Jew, and declared it a Jewish home, with legalized  
> racism, persecuted you in the ghetto that you now are forced to  
> live in as a refugee, then would you object if they started  
> bringing in more Jewish people to settle in other parts of your  
> house or other parts of the land that your house is on ?
>
>   Once there is democracy in the region then the people living  
> there can decide on governmental policies.  It is sufficient, in  
> item 5 to call for democracy for ALL people in the region with  
> equal rights for all, and leave it at that.  Sanctions Until  
> Democracy is the policy that we need to have.
>
>   item 1 re-write is also problematic in that it also discusses  
> "Israel" as if it is a legitimate project.  "Israel" can never be  
> mentioned without reference to the ethnic cleansing of Palestinians  
> - since that is what Israel represents. (see proper nonracist  
> reference to "Israel" in point 5)
>
>   Israel either needs to be in quotes or referred to as in section  
> 5 of the statement.
>
>   I also question the "recorded loss" in membership due to  
> zionism.  The only thing I am aware of is the increase in GRP  
> membership in Somerville due to the Parties stance on the  
> position.  Please clarify this "recorded loss".  Here we should  
> also note that sections of the social justice in movement have  
> historically been zionist and these racist elements are slowly  
> being forced to take the racist politics elsewhere such as teh  
> Democratic Party which is explicitly racist.  At the national level  
> I haven't read about any losses of any significance.
>
>   My general feeling is that these re-writes are responding to  
> zionists whose presence in social justice circles is decreasing and  
> who do not represent a consituency that will likely ever be  
> supportive of justice in palestine.  It is only zionists who raise  
> the concerns that you refer to and we should not overreact to these  
> usually racist concerns.  Better to educate people about the  
> history of "Israel".  Once people understand "Israel" as a colonial  
> settler enterprise, then they cease to have the concerns that you  
> raise.
>
>   ron francis
>
> "Colby E. Peterson" <saphron at verizon.net> wrote:
>   I intend to introduce this proposal to the Convention tomorrow.
>
> This proposal is based on my experience as Communications Director of
> this party when regularly dealing with members of our party, the
> general public, and the news media.
>
> Despite the fact that we are a state-level party, this issue ties
> directly to our local lives, and eventually to our wallets. Our
> stance on this issue is very important to our members. There have
> been a recorded loss in membership due to our stance on this issue.
> There is also a theoretical gain in membership, although I personally
> have not observed any. The problem is not our stance, which is just
> and correct, but what we leave up for interpretation. Our "enemies"
> in the media will create false interpretations of our stance and turn
> it into a viral publicity smear to demonize us and our position. This
> vulnerability is unacceptable and is due to the exclusion of certain
> key principles in our statement. These principles add balance to the
> statement, clarify the statement, make it less debatable, and bring
> it up to a higher standard.
>
> Correct statement? Absolutely.
> Flawless statement? Hardly. The statement could not even get passed
> by consensus.
>
> With the changes I propose below, I think it can be. I ask for your
> co-sponsorship.
>
> See you at the Convention.
>
> - Colby Peterson,
> Communications Director (Incumbent and running for re-election!)
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> A Proposal to Revise, Expand, and Improve the Green-Rainbow Party
> Statement on Palestine
>
> Background:
>
> At the Green-Rainbow Party State Convention of 2005, the party
> adopted by majority vote the Green-Rainbow Party Statement on
> Palestine. Since its adoption, the statement has been controversial
> within and outside the party for several reasons:
>
> 1. The statement lacks a reason why the party has chosen Israel as a
> subject of focus, attacking it for having a Jewish-privilege system
> while many of the other countries in the world, and particularly in
> the Middle East, that have other ethnic or religious privilege for
> some of their residents, go without criticism or even mention.
>
> 2. The statement does not contain a clause condemning or even
> regretting the violence in the region. Section 5 is often
> misinterpreted as an endorsement of violence against non-combatants,
> and demands clarification.
>
> 3. The statement does not acknowledge or recognize the history behind
> Jewish presence in the region, one of the key selling-points for  
> Israel.
>
> 4. The statement does not address the generations of Israeli
> nationals now living in the region. Their fate is left ambiguous and
> this is offensive and frightening to many people.
>
> Because of these loose ends, the Green-Rainbow Party has been under
> constant fire from Zionist and non-Zionist media outlets and has been
> labeled by one outlet as "the most anti-Semetic mainstream political
> entity in Massachusetts."
>
> The written and actual conduct of some high-profile GRP members has
> exacerbated this perception, a perception which we all know is
> completely false. As a political party that believes in human rights,
> certainly we cannot, by definition, be "anti-Semetic" nor "anti-
> Jewish." This proposal will also contain guidelines which party
> officials must adhere to when dealing with this highly sensitive  
> issue.
>
> If we are to tie these loose ends, we will no longer be open to such
> criticism and we would be able to better stand on our statement. The
> party must be united and just on this issue.
>
>
> Definitions:
>
>
> Party official: Any member of the Administrative or State Committees
> for the purpose of this proposal shall be considered, "party  
> officials."
>
> Zionist: Any person that defends or advocates for the apartheid
> system currently in effect in Israel and the occupied territories.
> Any person that believes that Jews have a greater claim to the land
> in the region than any other group.
>
>
> Proposal:
>
> The Green-Rainbow Party will change the Green-Rainbow Party Statement
> on Palestine in to reflect the following text:
>
> "Green-Rainbow Party Statement on Palestine
>
> The Green-Rainbow Party of Massachusetts, in consonance with its
> adherence to its Ten Key Values, has the following position on the
> issue of Palestine and Israel. This revised statement will be
> submitted to the national party through the International Committee:
>
> 1. The Green-Rainbow Party is opposed to all forms of government that
> favor or give privileges to one or some groups of residents over
> other groups. We take special issue with the government of Israel
> because it receives the highest amount of foreign aid per year from
> the United States. We see this aid as funding an illegal occupation
> and as supporting oppression against non-Jews in Israel. The Green-
> Rainbow Party calls for the end of all American military and economic
> aid to Israel. Additionally, the Green-Rainbow Party of Massachusetts
> supports the following means to bring pressure to bear on Israel:
> Divestment initiatives that seek to withdraw institutional
> investments from Israel state bonds and corporations that do business
> with Israel; academic boycotts of Israeli academics and academic
> institutions.
> 2. The Green-Rainbow Party calls for an ecologically sound commitment
> to equitably sharing and conserving all water and other natural
> resources among all peoples of the region.
> 3. The Green-Rainbow Party supports full implementation of the Right
> of Return for each Palestinian refugee, which means each Palestinian
> has the right to choose to return to his or her home and lands. This
> right is a fundamental human right and is enshrined in international
> law for all peoples of the world.
> 4. The Green-Rainbow Party also recognizes the historical
> significance of the region of Palestine and Israel for many different
> people, and supports initiatives for Jews, as well as other cultures
> originating in the region, to return to the region provided that
> these initiatives do not infringe nor supersede in any way on the
> rights of others.
> 5. The Green-Rainbow Party of Massachusetts calls for a secular,
> democratic governing entity for all people in the geographic region
> of historic Palestine, today referred to as Israel, the West Bank and
> Gaza. We support a democratic system with equal rights for all in
> which the peoples of the region democratically decide their future.
> We support a system that will unite all people to live together in
> peace, and support reconciliation between the generations of national
> Israelis and the oppressed in the occupied lands.
> 6. The Green-Rainbow Party 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. We do not support the targeting or killing of non-
> combatants in the region by any party."
>
> Additionally, this State Convention brings forth the following code
> of conduct for party officials when describing or dealing with this
> issue. Party officials are representatives of the party, and must
> maintain a high level of respect and decency when dealing with the
> public and the media, especially when public opinion has never been
> higher in support of the status-quo in Israel, a status-quo that we
> aim to change.
>
> 1. Party officials will not refer to Israel as merely a fictitious
> place, or otherwise arbitrary location. Referring to the region
> simply as Palestine is both acceptable and historically accurate.
> However, Israel is a UN-recognized body and has people, and possible
> allies, who identify as Israeli. This means that in written
> communications, party officials will not refer to Israel in quotation
> marks. To do so is disrespectful, arrogant, and possibly racist to
> people who identify as Israeli. It is also seen as possible allies
> and members of the media as immature and unprofessional.
>
> 2. Party members will recognize that the crimes we are opposed to are
> those of the government of Israel and the Zionist occupiers in
> Israel, and not of all of the Israeli people themselves.
>
> 3. Party officials will show tact and respect when appearing at pro-
> Palestinian or anti-Zionist events. If an event organizer expresses a
> request to a party official in respect to sign-age, message, or
> behavior at an event, the party official should immediately comply.
> Evidence of failing to comply with the requests of event organizers
> will be interpreted as conduct unbecoming of a party official and
> will result in recall proceedings for the violating party official.
>
> Budget Impact: None
>
> Implementation:
>
> 1. The GRP Secretary or their appointee will record and modify the
> existing statement to reflect all amendments and changes for the  
> record.
> 2. The Green-Rainbow Party Communications Director or chair of the
> Technology Committee or their appointee will update the GRP web site
> to reflect the changes.
> 3. The Green-Rainbow Party Communications Committee will prepare and
> disseminate information to the public, membership, and the media
> relating to the modified language, why the language was modified, and
> the changes themselves.
>
>
>
>
>
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
> Colby E. Peterson
> Communications Director
> Green-Rainbow Party
> www.green-rainbow.org
> communications.director at green-rainbow.org
> cell: 978.895.0650
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> 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