tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post8468012399590935209..comments2024-03-18T22:21:33.261-07:00Comments on The Debate Link: Of Blood and CountryDavid Schraubhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/04946653376744012423noreply@blogger.comBlogger14125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-56677821169214471902008-10-21T21:53:00.000-07:002008-10-21T21:53:00.000-07:00Hi. Two comments.First, Noel Ignatiev is certainl...Hi. Two comments.<BR/><BR/>First, Noel Ignatiev is certainly not Jewish. "Noel" means Christmas. "Ignatiev" is an aristocratic Russian family name -- many Slavs and no Jews bear it. There is nothing to suggest he is Jewish, save some Wikipedia crank who keeps reverting edits alleging, for whatever reasons, that Ignatiev is Jewish. He's not.<BR/><BR/>Second, on all nationalism as racism as a principled position, note that the particular nationalism at issue is the kind that is the cornerstone of international law. (The references at the <A HREF="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-determination#The_UN_Charter" REL="nofollow">Wikipedia</A> article on self-determination Re basically correct if you are looking deeper.) So you'd have to further express your principles position as: all nationalism, including the right of peoples to self-determination, is racism. More elegantly: the idea of "peoples" is racism and states should be decoupled from such racist fictions. <BR/><BR/>And there's your principled position and its problems in a nutshell. See also under Sweden, Hungary, Korea, Aotearoa, etc.Anonymousnoreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-66148532418886152982008-10-17T15:08:00.000-07:002008-10-17T15:08:00.000-07:00I'm not sure. Jack seems to be saying that he find...I'm not sure. Jack seems to be saying that he finds the "all nationalism is racism" argument plausible, while the "the only racist nationalism is Zionism" argument isn't. <BR/><BR/>I don't find the first argument all that plausible and would offer post-1965 America as an example of non-racist nationalism; our government acts with much more concern for our having cheap oil than for foreign people's lives, but it seems to do so on behalf of Americans of all races and with a de jure insistence on internal equality -- 1965 being significant not only for the voting rights act but also for the Immigration and Nationality Act of 1965. <BR/><BR/>I agree the second argument isn't plausible, but it seems a bit strawman because I didn't think anyone was making it. Are there people published in the mainstream press who believe that Zionism is racism but Nazism isn't? (I say "mainstream press" to exclude the StormFront types.)PGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09381347581328622706noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-56450295321303426942008-10-17T12:56:00.001-07:002008-10-17T12:56:00.001-07:00I don't think you two are actually in disagreement...I don't think you two are actually in disagreement here....David Schraubhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04946653376744012423noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-27562866016245759402008-10-17T12:56:00.000-07:002008-10-17T12:56:00.000-07:00But who says that the only racist nationalism is Z...But who says that the only racist nationalism is Zionism? Surely even the doofuses writing this encyclopedia recognized that the German fascist form of nationalism -- Nazism -- was racism.PGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09381347581328622706noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-39401298169418912352008-10-16T23:44:00.000-07:002008-10-16T23:44:00.000-07:00Thats not unreasonable. I was just saying that the...Thats not unreasonable. I was just saying that the all nationalism is racism position is plausible and consistent in a way that "only Zionism is racism" is not.Jackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07617213327912889142noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-91217675637623839472008-10-16T18:08:00.000-07:002008-10-16T18:08:00.000-07:00Nationalism explicitly argues that a government sh...<I>Nationalism explicitly argues that a government should pursue the interests of either a given ethnic group or, at the very least, of people who reside withing certain boundaries. Moreover, nationalism entails that those interests should be pursued to the exclusion of the interests and (almost always) rights of people who live outside those boundaries. </I><BR/><BR/>But by that definition, most Americans, especially politically conservative ones, are nationalists. They will say, for example, that it is morally worse for Ayers to have been involved in a group whose members threatened the lives of Americans than it would have been had the Weathermen operated in Sweden. Most people all over the world want their government to pursue the interests of the people living within the borders of the country for which that government has responsibility, even to the exclusion of the interests of people outside those borders. I would say that to the extent the U.S. in the 20th century has moved toward a fairly non-racist immigration policy (i.e. one that does not privilege certain ethnicities and races over others), its nationalism cannot be racist because so many races are within its borders.PGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09381347581328622706noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-70080700863770050232008-10-16T14:29:00.000-07:002008-10-16T14:29:00.000-07:00Yeah, if the Encyclopedia has no entry on national...Yeah, if the Encyclopedia has no entry on nationalism then we have a big problem. I'd argue nationalism has always had an element of descent about it- thats not to say there have never been multi-ethnic states but certainly nationalism in the post-soviet era has been about establishing states for particular ethnic groups- even when a multi-ethnic state would have resource and strategic advantages. The fact that most of these ethnic groups live in relatively proximate areas is basically tangential to the point. This is evidenced not least of all by the fact when ethnic populations don't have geographically continuous states wars are more likely. <BR/><BR/>I did forget about the Matrix. Also, Rastafarian influences reggae and hip hop often mentions Zion.<BR/><BR/>Pg, you're right to talk about the racist policies associated with and brought about by nationalism and that was certainly on my mind. But when I said I could accept a position that held nationalism was inherently racist I was thinking of an argument something like the following. Nationalism explicitly argues that a government should pursue the interests of either a given ethnic group or, at the very least, of people who reside withing certain boundaries. Moreover, nationalism entails that those interests should be pursued to the exclusion of the interests and (almost always) rights of people who live outside those boundaries. Boundaries are often based on ethnic geography and our understanding of the people who live outside our own boundaries almost always incorporates race/ethnicity. <BR/><BR/>I don't know if this would fit under your definition of racism. I'm not sure it fits under mine- but its a plausible not a particularly offensive claim that I can imagine this sort of publication making.<BR/><BR/>A nationalism of Islam is probably still tied up in race. Sure, in principle anyone can become a Muslim. But that means requiring people to give up something thats almost always tied up in their ethnic/racial identity. Though as it happens Iran is quite tolerant of religious minorities (in some ways they have more rights than Muslims). On the other hand, Iran does persecute its Kurdish minority- its unlikely Iran has purged its Persian identity completely. It isn't JUST an Islamic Republic.Jackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07617213327912889142noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-56683435607999341572008-10-16T13:29:00.000-07:002008-10-16T13:29:00.000-07:00I'm pretty sure that India has a civil marriage op...I'm pretty sure that India has a civil marriage option, though; it's technically secular in a way that Israel isn't.<BR/><BR/>Having gone from my hometown of almost no Jews, to a major university, to the D.C. suburbs, to New York City, I found this guy's experience of the mid-sized city with a small but very much present Jewish population interesting, especially how he describes the way in which "post-anti-Semitic humor works."<BR/><BR/>I don't think I understand the idea that "nationalism" is inherently a form of racism, although there is a potentially racist quality to most nationalisms. Hindutva, for example, is obviously religiously bigoted and relying on a false historical memory of some pure, unified Hindu India to which we should return, but I don't think it's obviously racially bigoted. From what I can tell, a Hindu and Muslim in Mumbai probably have a closer genetic link -- despite the effect of caste intra-marriage in reducing Hindu genetic diversity -- than that urban Hindu does to a tribal person who would fit into the extremely broad meaning of "Hindu" and thus isn't excluded from the zealots' Hindutva. And it's those faux-fundamentalist-freaks who are burning down Christian villages to get the inhabitants to "reconvert" back to Hinduism. <BR/><BR/>This seems to me a policing of religious lines but not of racial ones. In contrast, we know Nazism explicitly policed racial lines, as did American white supremacy; an obsession with bloodline as deciding whether one was part of the nation seems like the easy marker of a racist nationalism. While the caste system creates Hindus' own bloodline obsession, there's no suggestion that the scheduled castes are not part of India. The caste bigots are exactly the type who feel they can't do without Dalits, because who else will deal with the bigots' shit -- literally?<BR/><BR/>On the other hand, I suppose caste Hinduism is a racist nationalism if one only tolerates the "lower" Hindu bloodline as a necessary evil and obstructs their efforts to be equal citizens of the nation. However, in non-caste religions like Islam, this wouldn't be an issue; all Muslims are equal. So is Islamic Iran a racist nationalism?PGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09381347581328622706noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-63876232715461629572008-10-16T08:24:00.000-07:002008-10-16T08:24:00.000-07:00What about the song from the orgy scene in The Mat...What about the song from the orgy scene in The Matrix? (Also, the city itself).<BR/><BR/>Given that the encyclopedia doesn't have an entry on nationalism, period, it's difficult for me to buy the "all nationalism is racism excuse". And Ignatiev seems intent on distinguishing Zionism from other forms of nationalism as being based off descent, rather than (among other things) place of birth.David Schraubhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04946653376744012423noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-3115558935179851352008-10-16T07:48:00.000-07:002008-10-16T07:48:00.000-07:00I wonder if the encyclopedia defines all nationali...I wonder if the encyclopedia defines all nationalisms as racist. In principle I could accept such a position (though in practice nation states are really really important and necessary until such time as everyone extends the protection of rights to everyone else). Though, as you suggest, the fact that the Encyclopedia isn't going to include articles on every other nationalism is problematic to say the least.<BR/><BR/>Zionism needs a better PR campaign though. In my experience though, a lot or people don't know what Zionism is and basically just think of it as this spooky mysterious conspiratorial ideology. Many are only familiar with the word "Zion" from hearing about The Elders of Zion fraud (which unfortunately isn't always explained as such).Jackhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07617213327912889142noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-53247326507059668012008-10-15T22:51:00.000-07:002008-10-15T22:51:00.000-07:00Stunningly, British colonization tends to fuck thi...Stunningly, British colonization tends to fuck things up.David Schraubhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04946653376744012423noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-80789565349284667022008-10-15T22:50:00.000-07:002008-10-15T22:50:00.000-07:00British control -- the rules are basically that ea...<I>British control -- the rules are basically that each religion controls the rule for its own group</I><BR/><BR/>Yep, that's how India ended up with its various "<A HREF="http://www.blogdenovo.org/archives/000993.html" REL="nofollow">personal laws</A>" too.PGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09381347581328622706noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-48515749386983640632008-10-15T17:25:00.000-07:002008-10-15T17:25:00.000-07:00If you convert under Orthodox rules, you should be...If you convert under Orthodox rules, you should be allowed to marry a fellow Jew. But those rules (which actually date back to British control -- the rules are basically that each religion controls the rule for its own group) are a travesty and I strongly urge their repeal.David Schraubhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04946653376744012423noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7321349.post-6484681138860097482008-10-15T17:02:00.000-07:002008-10-15T17:02:00.000-07:00"but the principle is well established that, both ..."but the principle is well established that, both religiously and as far as the state of Israel is concerned, one can be Jewish without having Jewish descent."<BR/><BR/>This certainly seems to be true for the standard required to be admitted to Israel, but what about the <A HREF="http://articles.latimes.com/2007/jul/26/world/fg-marriage26" REL="nofollow">standards for being allowed to marry</A>? I'd normally be indifferent to this -- OK, so you're not Jewish enough to marry in an Orthodox temple, get married somewhere else -- except Israel apparently lacks the civil marriage option.PGhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/09381347581328622706noreply@blogger.com