Anti-Semitism, Extremism, AIPAC and More....

Mel Gibson is a no-good, anti-semitic idiot.

Over the weekend, Gibson made outrageously anti-semitic remarks after being pulled-over for a drunk-driving incident. TMZ reported that Gibson said, "The Jews are responsible for all the wars in the world," and asked the arresting officer, "Are you a Jew?" The fact is Gibson was probably barely just buzzed, posting a .12% BAC, which in all likelihood amounts to a little less than two beers. Now, even if he were intoxicated beyond belief one could make the argument that he were an anti-semite, but certainly with such low BAC levels there can be little doubt. The fact is that racism--and anti-semitism more specifically--still exist in profoundly disturbing ways. It would be a gross fallacy to assert otherwise.

Yet, as an impassioned opponent of bigotry, I also find it upsetting when criticism of Israel becomes confused for the scourge that is anti-semitism. The pro-war lobby AIPAC has worked hard to conflate the two, leaving even doveish politicians scared to take stances critical of the injustices of Israeli politics. As The Nation reports:

Criticizing Israeli actions, even in the best of faith, is anti-Israel and possibly anti-Semitic; enthusiastically backing whatever military action Israel undertakes is the only acceptable stance.

The discourse in our country has truly limited a deep engagement with the extremism that exists among Israeli politicians, leaving us to believe that if the Arabs would only accept peace, all would be well. Such a gross simplification and flattening of an array crimes is not only wrong, but closes off any options for addressing the conflict in an effective manner.

I was reminded of this as I was browsing The Nation, where I clicked on a google ad that linked to an article by an Israeli newspaper. The article was an op-ed piece that proposed a "new solution" to dealing with the Palestinians in the occupied West Bank. Since it would be unacceptable to force them to leave, the author proposed paying them each $30,000 so that they would willingly leave. He cites the horrid living conditions imposed on the occupied territories as an impetus for the residents to accept such an offer. Ultimately, he rationalizes that it would be cheaper to deal with "the problem" in this way. The ultimate goal? To solve the demographic problem in Israel. Demographics? New Solutions? Mass Exportation? It all sounds eerily reminiscent. I am not trying to say that all Israelis think as such, but I do believe it's important to realize that such extremism is alive and well on both sides. Afterall, politicians from the Yisrael Beiteinu party who propose even more drastic "solutions " gained more seats in the Israeli parliament this past election than did Likud, Ariel Sharon's popular, hawkish right-wing party.