A Moral Principle met a Material Interest on a bridge wide enough for but one.
"Down, you base thing!" thundered the Moral Principle, "and let me pass over you!"
The Material Interest merely looked in the other's eyes without saying anything.
"Ah," said the Moral Principle, hestitatingly, "let us draw lots to see which shall retire till the other has crossed."
The Material Interest maintained an unbroken silence and an unwavering stare.
"In order to avoid a conflict," the Moral Principle resumed, somewhat uneasily, "I shall myself lie down and let you walk over me."
Then the Material Interest found a tongue, and by a strange coincidence it was its own tongue. "I don't think you are very good walking," it said. "I am a little particular about what I have underfoot. Suppose you get off into the water."
It occurred that way.
The Moral Principle & the Material Interest - Ambrose Bierce
The Australian's Zionist enforcers cannot rest until those who've strayed from the party line have been rounded up and returned to the ideological fold. Former National Union of Students (NUS) prez Rose (daughter of Liz) Jackson was one such. Their vindictiveness towards her has been documented in my 30/7/08 post The Bile Duct of the Nation. But, now that she's finally been corralled, will all be forgiven? Read all about it:
ALP candidate rues anti-Zionist stance read the headline in The Australian of 23/8/08. "Rose Jackson, the former campaign manager for failed Labor candidate George Newhouse, has retracted anti-Zionist statements she made in 2006 as she attempts to clinch a seat on a Sydney local council with a large proportion of Jewish voters."
Jackson's crime? As NUS president, she had sent an email to a chat room 2 years ago, saying that "she opposed Zionism because it calls for the creation of a Jewish state, 'and I think all governments should be secular. No Jewish, Islamic, Christian states anywhere in the world, just good, robust, secular democracies. By speaking out on behalf of the Palestinians and Lebanese people, we can give voice to those that some governments would wish to silence'."
Oh, dear! Jackson's now backpeddling furiously. Her comments back then, she says, were "naive. Looking back, I think I just bought the prevailing polemic on campus at the time that Israel was some sort of quasi-theocracy. Having explored the subject more deeply since then, I understand this is nonsense. I realise I just misunderstood. Obviously, the state of Israel is not a state for the Jewish religion, but a homeland for the Jewish people. It's a really robust democracy; there are plenty of non-Jewish people in Israel who have full citizenship rights. If there's discrimination, it's no worse than what would happen in Australia or America or anywhere else. I completely support Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state."
Jackson was rewarded by a pat on the head from Vic Alhadeff, CEO of the NSW Jewish Board of Deputies: "It would have been very easy for Ms Jackson to go along with the anti-Semitism of the far Left when she was president of the NUS. Instead she chose the politically unpopular and risky path of speaking out against the anti-Semitism of the far Left, and she deserves credit for that." Should she not be consigned to the political dustbin at the upcoming council elections on September 13 Jackson can perhaps look forward to (a) a right rambamming* in Israel; (b) an open door into state/federal politics; (c) further rambamming in Israel; and (d) heaps of photo-ops with lobby movers & shakers.
[*Rambam (v) To be sponsored by smooth-talking Israel lobbyists in Australia on a grooming session by tough-talking PR people in Israel with a view to adopting the missionary position for Israel when required in Australia. Usually said of Australian politicians, media hacks and other serviceable community misleaders.]
Jackson's climb-down and Alhadeff's spin warrant analysis. To begin with the latter. Alhadeff's words (and Jackson's) imply that, as NUS prez, she was easily manipulated. He says by an evil anti-Semitic entity known as the "far Left." She, by the influence of "the prevailing polemic on campus at the time." These two really need to sort this out. Either way, however, the implication is clear - the lady's mere putty in the hands of others. Perfect pollie material! Also, Alhadeff couldn't be clearer on the subject of anti-Semitism. His words falsely imply that to oppose the concept of a Jewish state in Palestine is to be an anti-Semite. Ipso facto, Jackson was once an anti-Semite. Having recanted, however, she can now presumably be described as a reformed anti-Semite. Howling nonsense, of course, but why expose yourself to such implied smears?
Let's now examine the 'intellectual' baggage Jackson's now taken on:
"The state of Israel is not a state for the Jewish religion, but a homeland for the Jewish people."
Yes, that's the Zionist line. And for those who toe it, Israel belongs not just to those who live there, a majority of whom are Jews, but to Jews wherever they are, whether practising or not, whether desirous of living there or not. The only requirement to take up Israeli citizenship is to have a Jewish mother/grandmother. However, if you were born there, or your parents or grandparents were born there (as is the case for the now millions of Muslim and Christian Palestinian refugees descended from the population expelled by Zionist forces under cover of war in 1948), but your mother/grandmother isn't Jewish, stiff cheddar - stay away. So, in return for accepting the Zionist belief (which has no basis in international law) that there exists an entity called "the Jewish people", whose only real home is Israel, one must accept the continued exclusion of millions of non-Jews from that place, despite their real and proven connection to it, and despite their right to return to it being grounded in international law.
"[Israel's] a really robust democracy."
Only superficially. Jackson is ignorant of, or chooses to overlook, the fact that Israel is both democracy and Jewish (ie having a Jewish majority) simply because 750,000 indigenous non-Jews were expelled from its territory in 1948. For Israel to be a genuine democracy it would have to allow back in and give the vote to those millions of Palestinian refugees now disenfranchised and stateless beyond its borders. Israel's "really robust democracy" is based on one almighty Israeli-engineered gerrymander.
"There are plenty of non-Jewish people in Israel who have full citizenship rights."
Jackson again is either ignorant of, or chooses to ignore, the fact that those "non-Jewish people," the indigenous rump that somehow managed to avoid being expelled in 1948, do not have the same citizenship rights as Israeli Jews. Yes, they have have an equal vote. Yes, there are Palestinian Arabs in the Israeli parliament. And yes, (at least in principle) they have equal standing before the law. However, they do not have the same inheritance rights, the same access to the material resources of the state (notably, land - 93% of which is off limits to non-Jewish citizens - and water), or the same access to welfare resources (such as religious services and child benefits) as Israeli Jews. Chapter 3 of Uri Davis' invaluable Apartheid Israel: Possibilities for the Struggle Within (2003) documents this fundamental inequality in citizenship rights between Israel's Jewish and non-Jewish citizens.
"If there is discrimination, it's no worse than what would happen in Australia..."
If there is discrimination!? Jackson's assertion is total nonsense. As Davis reveals, Israel is actually an apartheid state in that it discriminates in law between its Jewish and non-Jewish citizens. This is because it has incorporated the exclusivist constitutional stipulations (such as "land acquired as Jewish property"/"the inalienable property of the Jewish people"/"Jewish labour") of the World Zionist Organization, the Jewish Agency and the Jewish National Fund into Israeli law. Needless to say, there is no such distinction in Australian law between indigenous and non-indigenous Australians. And not only are there no indigenous Australian refugees living in exile, but there are no indigenous Australians living under military occupation.
"I completely support Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state."
Let's be clear about this: in supporting Israel's right to exist as a Jewish state, Jackson supports its right to discriminate by law against its indigenous Palestinian Arab population, whether they be second class citizens inside pre-1967 Israel, under Israeli military occupation in the Palestinian territories of the West Bank and Gaza Strip since 1967, or stateless exiles since 1948.
No political post is worth your soul, Rose.