Sunday, November 07, 2004

Reading material

The Maroon has gotten its act together and is putting stuff online with shocking rapidity. From Friday's issue, here's Molly's piece on anti-Zionism at Columbia, and here's mine about New York anti-Americanism and American anti-New York-ism.

2 comments:

Anonymous said...

It is unfortunate that Ms. Schranz commits the same fallacy as Joseph Massad in her article. She compares Massad's statement to the New York Times with an offensive cartoon published in the Columbia Spectator. In doing so, she suggests that Massad's statement was anti-Semitic, that it is comparable to an offense to African-Americans. In fact, Massad spoke (in this instance) against "a pro-Israel group." African-American is a race; "pro-Israel" is a political position. By suggesting in her article that criticizing a "pro-Israel group" is the same as criticizing all Jews, Ms. Schranz is resorting to the same generalizations as her adversaries. Both sides should remember that being Jewish and being "pro-Israel" are not synonymous.

Molly said...

Anonymous-

Actually, I know the difference between being anti-Israel and being anti-semetic. I also know the difference between the words "race" and "religion." If you had read my article carefully you'd see that I call Massad's statement that "the Jew is the new Nazi" an anti-Semetic remark, because to compare a Jew to a Nazi, is an inherintly anti-Semetic construct. This statement by Massad is an anti-Semetic one, I do not know if he is a total anti-Semite or not. However, I do know that if he didn't want to get caught up in the anti-Semitic rhetoric, then he should restrick himself to purely anti-Zionist remarks and should leave Nazi comparisons out of the dialogue.

Regarding your comments about my comparison of the African American cartoon incident and Massad's statements: I'm not quite sure why there's a difference whether the student group attacked is a group based on race or one based on national identity. Yes, I just said, "national identity." Whether or not the state of Israel is a legitimate state is not a matter of opinion. In 1948 the United Nations established the state of Israel. Although in the 1970's they'd also go on to call it a racist state (at the urging of several Arab countries) and then later, revoke that statement, throughout it all one's belief in the state of Israel is not a political opinion, but the recognition of truth. - Ms. Schranz