The real enemy of the Jews - Why does Borat ignore the left?

[Dinner]

Originally posted by Ned
Nice.

So, Democrat KKK members can "change" to good, civil-rights supporting politicians, but Republicans cannot? Is that the lesson of Oerdin's post, because I think this is the universal perception forstered by Democrats everywhere, from the media to the black leadership.

Not at all. The point is in this proticular comparision, Lott vs Byrd, Lot was making absolutely racist comments in support of segrigation just a couple of years ago while Byrd had a basic level membership in the KKK back in 1942. Over the last 64 years Byrd's worked with the NAACP enough that the NAACP gives Byrd their highest ranking possible so if the NAACP says the guy is reformed then I don't see why I should disagree.

To compare the NAACP still rates Lott as a bigot. Is politics at play? Possibily however I note that several Republicans also get the NAACP's highest ranking but Lott doesn't therefor there must be something with the policies Lott pushes as well as the racist public comments Lott makes.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by loinburger

Friends don't let friends go to hell for being christ-killers. On the other hand, evangelicals don't mind having their Jewish "friends" go to hell if it speeds up the evangelicals' being raptured away.

In other words, the fact that evangelicals are attempting to hasten a devastating war in the middle east doesn't mean that evangelicals are particularly friendly towards Jews.


It's not surprising that the same evangelicals who are wishing for the destruction of Israel are also wishing for the destruction of non-Israeli Jews. After all, if you're Jewish and you're not living in Israel, then you're not hastening the apocalypse, so why should the evangelicals give a damn about you? An Isreali Jew is helping to rapture away the evangelical, but a non-Isreali Jew is just a christ-killer who isn't benefitting the evangelical.

1. Whether I actually go to hell or not is not going to be in the least bit impacted by what evangelists believe.

2. While some evangelists may support Israel, for apocalypse reasons, my impression is that most mainstream Southern baptist types dont.

3. I know evangelists who treat American Jews just fine.

Krauthammer is, to some extent right. While we should certainly be concerned about apathy towards antisemitism and ALL forms of bigotry, it seems the real problem of antisemitism is much stronger among those Krauthammer cited. Its not that they criticize some of Israels policies - Kraut cited individuals whose rhetoric is antisemitic. There are also acts of violence.

Now I dont share Krauts domestic agenda, and so I dont want us to RELY on an alliance with evangelicals, or to fail to cultivate liberal allies. But I think what he says about Borat is not wrong (though I doubt thered be as much humor in having Borat take on European lefty antisemites as in taking on hillbillies)

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Oerdin
Ned, you still haven't explained how Borat ignores the left since large parts of the movie was taken up making fun of black leaders and feminists.

well, uhm, might the fact that Krauthammer isnt antifeminist mean that he doesnt see attacks on feminists as redeeming Borat?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Oerdin
It's true. Most anti-semetic attacks in Europe are commited by muslim immigrants.

thats violent attacks.

Is that whats under discussion? Do the Arizona bar patrons Borat sings with commit violent attacks on Jews? No, they are apathetic about antisemitism.

Pardon me, but I find the winking cartoons of Israelis as long nosed baby eaters rather more likely to lead to bad things down the road then a group of Arizona bar patrons singing a silly song with Borat.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by lord of the mark

well, uhm, might the fact that Krauthammer isnt antifeminist mean that he doesnt see attacks on feminists as redeeming Borat?

The claim made in the thread title was that Borat ignores the left. I pointed out several cases were Borat did not ignore the left therefor Ned's claim that Borat unfairly picks on the right while ignoring the left doesn't seem to be valid.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Oerdin


The claim made in the thread title was that Borat ignores the left. I pointed out several cases were Borat did not ignore the left therefor Ned's claim that Borat unfairly picks on the right while ignoring the left doesn't seem to be valid.

im not really focusing on Ned, but on Krauthammer. If youre looking for an easy target .......

[GePap]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


Krauthammer is, to some extent right. While we should certainly be concerned about apathy towards antisemitism and ALL forms of bigotry, it seems the real problem of antisemitism is much stronger among those Krauthammer cited. Its not that they criticize some of Israels policies - Kraut cited individuals whose rhetoric is antisemitic. There are also acts of violence.

Ah, the old cabnard that anti-zionism equal anti-semitism. How tired and intellectually hollow an arguement. As as for citing people, he cited 1 single Norwegian academic. WOW. How damming.

Now I dont share Krauts domestic agenda, and so I dont want us to RELY on an alliance with evangelicals, or to fail to cultivate liberal allies. But I think what he says about Borat is not wrong (though I doubt thered be as much humor in having Borat take on European lefty antisemites as in taking on hillbillies)

NO Lefty academic "anti-semite" would sing "throw a Jew down the well." They would be intelligent enough to see what the song was about.

[Dinner]

Originally posted by lord of the mark


im not really focusing on Ned, but on Krauthammer. If youre looking for an easy target .......

Look, it's the fricking thrad title. I think this is the right thread to discuse it in.

[Bosh]

Aaaargh now I have "in my country there is problem" stuck in my head.

*hums "grab the Jew by his horns*

Aaargh!

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by GePap


Ah, the old cabnard that anti-zionism equal anti-semitism. How tired and intellectually hollow an arguement. As as for citing people, he cited 1 single Norwegian academic. WOW. How damming.

Even IF not all anti-zionism is antisemitism, SOME expressions of anti-zionism ARE antisemitic. Not all X is Y, doesnt imply that X is never Y. Krauthammer believes, as do I, that much of the venom, and of course some of the rhetoric and imagery, found in Europe IS antisemitic. That it is put in antizionist terms does not make it less so.

NO Lefty academic "anti-semite" would sing "throw a Jew down the well." They would be intelligent enough to see what the song was about.

They would be more subtle, and thus more effective.

[Gibsie]

Yes, the leftist who doesn't enjoy a good sing-song about killing Jews and instead campaigns against the marginalisation of Palestinians is of course a far greater danger.

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Gibsie
Yes, the leftist who doesn't enjoy a good sing-song about killing Jews and instead campaigns against the marginalisation of Palestinians is of course a far greater danger.

Sigh. For the thousandth time, theres nothing wrong with being concerned about Palestinians. Its using antisemitic tropes in rhetoric and imagery that is problematic.

these folks, for example are concerned about Palestinian rights

http://www.whitecivilrights.com/israel-brutalizes-palestine-as-no-one-cares_496.html

Of course theyre rightwingers, so perhaps you will more easily accept that their "antizionism" is a cover for something else.

[Cyclotron]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
Even IF not all anti-zionism is antisemitism

Whoa, now, are you actually in doubt here?

[lord of the mark]

Originally posted by Cyclotron


Whoa, now, are you actually in doubt here?

I think a serious argument could be made. I dont think it could be made here, though. And Im not going to try.
Thats why I accepted, for the sake of discussion, that opposition to the existence of a Jewish state is not per se antisemitism. The point of such acceptance is to FOCUS the discussion, and avoid having it drift off.


Do you believe that antizionism is never a cover for antisemitism? Do you believe that the words and images used by antizionists are never antisemitic?

Do you really believe Jews should be more worried about singers in a bar in arizona, then about teenagers beaten up in Paris? Or about folks who see Israeli civilians targeted, and think they had it coming?

Maybe you do, based on your assumptions. I think that I, more than you, are whom Kraut was aiming at, and he was dead on persuasive for me.

[Cyclotron]

Originally posted by lord of the mark
I think a serious argument could be made. I dont think it could be made here, though. And Im not going to try.
Thats why I accepted, for the sake of discussion, that opposition to the existence of a Jewish state is not per se antisemitism. The point of such acceptance is to FOCUS the discussion, and avoid having it drift off.

I understand your reason for accepting it; it just seems like a bizarre premise - "those who oppose the existence of this state are anti-semites." I would expect such an argument to be heavily supported by, well, something quite substantial, and to make this argument in all seriousness is to me worthy of note by itself.

Do you believe that antizionism is never a cover for antisemitism? Do you believe that the words and images used by antizionists are never antisemitic?

Of course not. I shouldn't have to point out to you that a negative doesn't prove a positive. Obviously people who are strongly anti-Semitic are unlikely to be pro-Israel.

Do you really believe Jews should be more worried about singers in a bar in arizona, then about teenagers beaten up in Paris? Or about folks who see Israeli civilians targeted, and think they had it coming?

I don't think that is what the argument was.

His defense is that he is using Borat’s anti-Semitism as a “tool” to expose it in others. And that his Arizona bar stunt revealed, if not anti-Semitism, then “indifference” to anti-Semitism. And that, he maintains, was the path to the Holocaust.

Cohen is not arguing (from this) that Jews should be more worried about people who sing along with his faux-Kazakh anti-semitic songs than violent anti-semites. He is arguing that anti-semitism exists in a hidden form that needs to be exposed, because it is that which is hidden, not just that which is obvious and well-known, that leads to such disasters as the Holocaust. I don't see the great need to point out the anti-Semitism of people who are already clearly anti-Semites; that is clearly redundancy, and probably wouldn't make for very good comedy either. I don't need Borat to tell me that a bunch of Iranian cartoons depicting Jews as parasites or murderers is probably anti-Semitic, or to point out the significance of that anti-Semitism. It is hatred and bigotry that is concealed from view which he targets.

Can a man that smart really believe that indifference to anti-Semitism and the road to the Holocaust are to be found in a country and western bar in Tucson?

If they were found in a bar in early 20th century Germany, I don't see why they cannot be found in a similar place in Arizona. That "road," as he puts it, lies within people, for without those people leaders like Hitler are impotent. I find the argument that Cohen should direct his criticism at the blatantly obvious to be specious and trite.

As for anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism, I suppose I should bow out here; I simply can't conceive of the logic by which you would positively link the two and only grudgingly admit that maybe, just maybe one could believe in one without the other. I just can't wrap my head around that, which makes me a poor candidate to continue such a discussion.