I receive a lot of suggestions of other countries to boycott. Turkey, North Korea, Sudan, etc. So why don’t I also block them?
1. This is not a crusade against every injustice in the world. It is a contribution to the cultural boycott of Israel because of its treatment of Gaza and the Palestinians, as explained previously. That other regimes are also corrupt, racist, and oppressive should not be used as an argument against such a reaction, or to alleviate the burden of guilt of the Israeli regime.
2. Different issues call for different means. I have very few visitors from any of the countries that have been suggested. I have severe doubts that anyone in Somalia would even notice it if they were blocked from a site about Bob Dylan.
3. Quite a few have voiced concern for the many Dylan fans in Israel who are against the current state of affairs and who are now said — erroneously, it should be added — to be deprieved of the opportunity to sing Masters of War in protest against Netanyahu, and quite a few Israeli Dylan fans have called me a hypocritical asshole, but none, as far as I remember, have combined the two: the outcries of injustice towards the good Israeli Dylan fans have come from people who have no interest whatsover in Dylan and his music, not from those who want to use Dylan songs against the regime.
It is my hope that for those unfortunate few, the solidarity with the oppressed will be greater than the inconvenience of being barred from the site, just as it was for the few white anti-apartheid authors in South Africa who because of the boycott were deprieved of the contact with the western culture to which they felt themselves to belong.
Update: I came across this article by Lawrence Davidson, Professor of history at West Chester University, who lines up the arguments for and against a boycott much better than I could ever do.
*
The comments to this post are being moderated. I will not let through posts with the sole or main purpose (1) to tell me that I’m an idiot (no need to restate the obvious), or (2) to duplicate any of the “facts” in the comments to the previous post.
I now can say that I am deeply saddened by your view. I am amazed that you continue this boycott. At least you acknowledge that you can understand why the other side carries so much vitriol against you. While I (a US citizen),( and probably most Israelis) are deeply appalled by the poor standard of living and terrible conditions that most in Gaza are experiencing, I am even more offended by your overtly racist views on several accounts and even more so by your lack of acknowledgement or self-awareness of your own racism. This is not a blanket statement that anyone who says or does anything against Israel is antisemitic. This is an awareness that the ugly head of antisemitism and racism is rearing its ugly head yet again in Europe and this time more covertly. I was under the impression that much of this was fueled by large waves of Muslims into European countries and their pro-palestinian views and propaganda, however the ignorance of the middle eastern situation by some in Europe (and elsewhere) and your ignorance of the fact is really despicable.
Here is why your opinion and deeds are incorrect (again this is not the proper forum for this but I am upset because I really like your site and enjoyed your humor and approach, and want to see if your opinions are amenable to the ‘truth’):
1. Look up the definition of Apartheid….actually, let me help you: Apartheid is a a system of legal racial segregation enforced by the National Party government in South Africa between 1948 and 1994, under which the rights of the majority non-white inhabitants of South Africa were curtailed and minority rule by white people was maintained.
Israel is a democracy, Non-Jewish people are given full and equal rights as are homosexuals, and other’s which are persecuted. There is freedom of the press and freedom of speech.
The ‘oppressed’ people of Gaza are killed if they disagree with Hamas (a fascist and terrorist regime) who have killed many of their own people for disagreeing with their islamo-fascist ideals.
Islamic holy sites and Christian Holy sites in Israel are kept open and maintained by Muslims and Christians and people for the most part are allowed to visit them as they please. On the other hand, Jewish (and Christian) holy sites are desecrated in Palestinian lands (a travesty) – Bob referred to this in his apparently much-maligned song.
2. The basic debate is not these small yet explosive issues which periodically pop up. The issue is, should Jewish people have a homeland and where should it be? If your answer is ‘yes’ then how do we go about this…….Israel, as a sovereign state left Gaza with no blockade several years ago…the ‘democratically elected government’ has killed off rival factions or anyone else interested in peace. They have spent donated money on bombs and rockets instead of necessities for their people and have confiscated donated food and supplies brought in from Israel. Israel has left them to their own accord and been met with terrorist acts and thousands of rockets. This makes a blockade necessary and that need to be enforced. When the people of Gaza are fed up enough with Hamas they will find a willing partner in Peace with Israel.
If your answer in ‘No’ then continue your boycott and continue to live in your ivory tower where your pseudo-intellectual stance is deep seeded in the dark history of antisemitism which hides just under your conscious mind. Sleep well tonight and keep an open mind to the truth.
Reconsider the boycott…………..have an open mind.
Hi Eyolf
I am a frequent user of your site and regard it as the best source of Dylan tabs on the net. I would like to express my deepest and most sincere respect for your action against the Israeli state and its injustices to the world. The cultural boycott remains one of the most important ways of affecting Israel to date. You have my support and i think you are setting a great example for other websites.
Nicolai Højlund
The is so much vitriol running in this ‘debate’ that it is hard not to jump in and emulate the tone of some of the contributors. I’ll try not to.
@Brett
Seems strange that you should waste so much energy over a relatively minor incident in the history of the world as Eyolf’s boycott (no disrespect intended Eyolf) when compared to the effects and consequences of the Israeli blockade of Gazza?
I speak for myself not for Eyolf but will comment on the questions that you raise though not with Eyolf’s eloquence or knowledge I fear.
Are my views influenced by Muslim immigration into Europe? I don’t think so as I have held the same view since the 6 Day War when Israel launched a comprehensive ‘pre-emptive’ attack on Egypt.
Apartheid? The crime of apartheid is defined by the 2002 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court as inhumane acts of a character similar to other crimes against humanity “committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime.”
You should have extended your wikipedia search a little further – but maybe that didn’t suite your argument.
Occupied territories, acknowledged as such by all I believe, as it is hard to deny land that you are holding my military force. But, of course the way out of that dilemma is to build ‘settlements’ on Palestinian land and eventually integrate them into Israel. This to the extent that even the arch supporter of Israel, the USA, offers a limp slapped wrist.
You shouldn’t confuse criticism of the actions of the Israeli state as anti Semitism or a wish to see the dispersal of the people currently occupying that land, clearly this is neither practical or humanitarian. However, the persistent aggressive actions of the Israeli state can only be condemned by anyone who wishes to see peace and prosperity for all who live in the region and the end to a running sore that continues to fuel violence across the world.
So, I would urge you to reconsider your support of a boycott that is of far more significance than tabs, and wise words, on Bob’s opus (important as these are).
I am an Israeli which happens to agree that settlements in the occupied territories do not serve Israeli interests, I also deeply dislike the current administration.
But…as someone that once argued for pulling out of Gaza by using the exact arguments posted here and expected that the people of Gaza leverage this move into positive channels, the result (Hamas in power & daily missile attacks on Israel) was deeply disappointing and for me raised questions about the basic axioms of human nature & willingness to live and prosper.
So, I find myself thinking more and more about what would be a good next step for Israel: pull out of the west bank? what guarantee do we have that Hamas does not take power? there clearly needs to be an atmosphere where this is not a viable scenario. lift the blockade? so Iranian rockets are freely admitted into Gaza which would lead to more Hamas missiles and eventually another Israeli raid on Gaza?
In any case the result may be worse for both Palestinian & Israelies.
This is the kind of stalemate Israel is stuck in and I don’t think there are any quick answers.
I urge everyone who reads this post to understand the complexity of the situation before forming an opinion, and arguments like “Israel is the responsible adult, therefore it is to blame” are simply non constructive as sometimes even adults are out of answers.
Thank you, Eyolf, for taking a moral stance against the Israeli brutality against palestinians. I know that you will be harassed and ridiculed for this and I just want to flag my support for your boycott.
May others follow!
As I devout (but not in a religious sense) follower of Bob Dylan and his music, I continue to rely on you as a great source of Dylan info/opinions/tablature. I respect your knowledge of music. I respect your knowledge of Dylan himself. I respect your decision concerning Israel.
Thank you for all the chords/tabs/info/stuff. They have been an endless help.
Cheers from Canada
-Marlowe
I noticed that your boycott was started in a moment of anger. I get that. Anyone reading the headlines would feel anger. But you may not be aware of how distorted the news is. I’m a big fan of both Dylan AND peace AND truth. Neighborhood Bully is, in my view, still relevant today. If you are serious about truth, about reading and watching the news with a critical eye, I recommend the following site, including their videos:
http://www.seconddraft.org/
Shalom and Salaam.
Wrong: the boycott was not started in a moment of anger, but after much deliberation. The first blog post in this series was written in anger, but everything else is well thought-through.
As for Neighbourhood Bully, I have to agree that it’s still relevant today — alas. The distorted world view, the historic lies, the demonization of criticism: everything is still the same, both in the official Israeli (and US) politics and rhetorics, and in the many comments to my posts, virtually none of which have taken issue with the things I say, but resorted either to abusive language, automatic outcries of “Antisemitism!”, or spurious arguments along the lines of “Israel has the right to defend itself” (forgetting that a country’s “right to defend itself”, which everyone agrees to, is not the same as “right to defend itself by force, which as a principle is not agreed to by anyone, not even Israel), or “Israel may have done some bad things, but …”, thus playing the “divide and conquer” trick on the area of rhetorics: split the problem into pieces that look small enough to handle one by one, and convince whoever wants to listen that what may look like a huge injustice is just a bunch of small, unimportant missteps.
So, to anyone wanting to educate me about the truth of Neighbourhood Bully, read this first, then tell me where it is wrong (without resorting to any of the tactics above), then we can have a discussion.
The same goes for all those of you who want to tell me that that I or the position I have taken is openly or cowardly-covertly antisemitic. That is plain stupid, and I don’t accept stupid comments (except in order to expose the stupidity).
Eyolf,
Here’s my take on this situation as someone who lives in Israel and understands a bit of Arabic.
While I don’t agree with those who automatically cry out “antisemitism” at any shred of criticism, I would like to point out that any criticism against the practices and customs of many Muslims (especially of the more radical factions) is automatically tagged by the Liberal Left in the west as “racism” or “Islamophobia”.
Which makes me wonder, why is that?
I think the world is heading towards a place where political-correctness has stopped being an assett and is used as a weapon by those who stand against every liberal western value. That’s an important point to understand vis-a-vis the situation in the middle east and the Muslim world at large.
The song “Neighbourhood Bully” is a good example of how people of your persuasion inthe west see the depiction of a harsh reality as hate speech. I read the lyrics of this song, and considering Israel’s history and conflicts, considering the history of Arab rhetoric against Israel and Jews (stemming from Islamic texts), I don’t think it’s that far off the mark. Calling this song racist, however, shows how willfully ignorant many people in the west choose to be about Israel and the Middle East.
Beyond that, there’s the practical issue:
I don’t think Israel should be immune to criticism, and I’m saying that as an Israeli.
That being said, much of this criticism in Europe is often tinged with more than a shadow of age-old anti-Jewish sentiment. The stereotype of the Jewish thief who “stole land” from “the innocent palestinians” is a classic example.
But anyway, Boycotts are self deafeating.
Especially among the academia and performing arts, boycotts serve the precise opposite of what they are trying to achieve.
The reason I’m saying that is simply because the first people to be hurt by those boycotts are the people who did NOT vote for the right wing parties currently leading Israel. the majority of those hurt by the boycotts are in fact left-leaning Israelis who get stuck between a rock and a hard place – and I don’t think that serves your purpose… It just serves to empower the extremists on both sides.
Which is why I’m urging you to re-consider this boycott, if only because you’re shooting youself in the foot with this action. It’s really beyond silly, I have no other words for it.
I’d also like to ask you, fairly, why is the world delegitimizing Israel’s democratically elected government while there seems to be no pressure on Hamas to remove the genocidal elements from its own charter? Is a government considered democratic and legitimate only if it serves your purpose to call it so? Even when Hamas rose to power in a Gaza military coup (while you pressure Israel to “recognize the Gazan vote”)?
Moreover, I don’t see why Israel should be singled out among all nations who may committ something wrong (and that’s up for debate from a perspective of international law).
oh, one last remark, as to the link you brought of the blog post regarding “Neighbourhood Bully”.
the post points out that this song sidesteps the main point of the Arab- Israeli conflict, whch the writer, Ellis, says is “Israel performing Ethnic cleansing against Palestinians”.
Eyolf, do you really think Israel is performing ethnic cleansing against Palestinians?
I’m curious to hear your answer, because if it is “yes”, just the fact that the population in Gaza has swelled from 300,000 at most in 1967 to over 1.5 million today, shows that if those claims are true, Israel really sucks at this.
Or is it just more plausible to call this “ethnic cleansing” story what it is: a lie – no – a blood libel against Israelis?
Eyolf,
No matter how erudite you are, there is a logical problem with the fact that when Israel does wrong, people attack its very right to exist. It’s the only country in the world that lives under that burden. No European country. No Asian country. No African country. No country in the Americas. No other country in the Mideast. Call me defensive, but I think this fact merits some reflection. It is irrelevant to say, as you have in the recent past, “my boycott isn’t intended to address every wrongdoing in the world.” Since your boycott is supportive of the classic anti-Israel double standard, it fails to legitimately address ANY wrongdoing. That is the point. In the seventies, it was acceptable, at least in the US, to refer to Palestinians in a dehumanizing way. It wasn’t fair to them and, importantly, it didn’t serve Israel’s interests either. A standard is a standard. All people deserve respect. But your boycott fails to promote this idea. Instead, by participating in the one-sided pile-on, you’re contributing to the dehumanization of Jews. You may say “no, I’m not,” but you are. You are aligned with elements around the world who are drawing racist cartoons in Arab newspapers, and other such behavior. And, in the same way it didn’t help anyone in the seventies, it doesn’t serve the Palestinians now. You’re pandering to the intellectually lazy. I’ve seen you cite lies by the Israeli government as provocation. I’ve seen you cite statistics about the level of racism in Israel. But when people point out that the same is true for other countries, you somehow, astonishingly, find a way to deem that all irrelevant. But, a standard is a standard. I could accept it if an actual Palestinian had a bias view. That would be understandable. But for a European, from afar, to look at a longstanding regional conflict, with guilt on both sides, and pick one side as their focus, is inane. I appreciate that you put up a very nice posting “Anti Hamas,” but it is lip service.
Hay Eylolf,
I have been discussing this subject with you in privet, but found your blog only now. I see that most of what you told me, and I told you, is presented here in some way or another, and considering this, it is nice of you to have answered me at all. After all, it must get boring after a while…
After reading this last post I think a have a point to add. You talk about “ethnic cleansing” and “Apartheid”, but fail to mention that 20% of Israelis are Muslims and are actually Palestinians. They are not well integrated into the general society, but most minorities aren’t (even other Jewish minorities). And in your country? How are Muslims integrated? And other ethnic minorities? And this without there being a territorial squabble… but Apartheid? Come on!
Health-care segregation?
Apartheid: YES
Israeli Arabs: NO (you know this if you’ve been to a Hospital in Israel!)
Public service segregation?
Apartheid: YES
Israeli Arabs: NO (all offices are used by Arabs and Jews alike)
Educational segregation?
Apartheid: YES
Israeli Arabs: NO (I study in university with many “Israeli Palestinians”)
Voting segregation?
Apartheid: YES
Israeli Arabs: NO (they vote as we all do, they have people in the Knesset)
Language segregation? (Indicative of cultural suppression)
Apartheid: YES
Israeli Arabs: NO (Israel has two official languages – Arabic is one of them!)
Cultural segregation:
Apartheid: YES
Israeli Arabs: NO (they are allowed to learn about “the NAKBA” in official textbooks)
Business segregation?
Apartheid: YES (not allowed to own a business)
Israeli Arabs: NO (equal rights)
Personal segregation?
Apartheid: YES (not allowed to marry whites)
Israeli Arabs: NO
This list goes on and on…. How can this be apartheid? Makes no sense to me.
@Boaz: I wouldn’t call it boring, but slightly repetitive: one gets to hear the same arguments (and non-arguments) over and over again. Hence also, I would say, the slightly curt tone in my mails to you, which may have come across as arrogant or dogmatic.
Anyway: Apartheid. Three points:
1. You forgot to mention citizenship, family unification, and the right to own land, where Israeli law does have different rules for Jews and non-Jews. I assume you will agree that these are not fringe phenomena, but quite fundamental living conditions. The Right to Return applies only to Jews, and Israeli law prevents Palestinian citizens of Israel who are married to Palestinians from the occupied territories from living together in Israel.
2. Several of your “NO”s are debatable, if not by law then at least by practice. The Sikkuy Equality Index is an instructive and depressing read. On just about every one of your points, there is a difference between Jews and Arabs ranging from “significant” to “glaring”, and in most areas, the difference is increasing at a rapid rate. Education: an Arab pupil costs ca. 1/6 of a Jewish, according to a recent study (on the bright side, the gap between Jews and Arabs in the educational system seems to be decreasing, according to the index). Health care: the difference is not as glaring as in the school system, but still significant. Etc.
3. This is the situation within Israel, but in the occupied areas, the differential treatment is both more blatant and more overt.
“Apartheid” is just a label, so if you’d be more happy to use another name for the same, then fine with me. To quote Naomi Klein: “The question is not ‘Is Israel the same as South Africa?’, it is ‘do Israel’s actions meet the international definition of what apartheid is?’.” And if you look at those conditions which includes the transfer of people, multiple tiers of law, official state segregation, then you see that, yes, it does meet that definition – which is different than saying it is South Africa. No two states are the same. It’s not the question, it’s a distraction.”
All that said, I do respect and commend you for sponsoring this forum and fostering the dialog. This aspect has not been lost on me!
@Dina: I don’t quite recognize your description of the lenience towards islam among the liberal left in the West. You’re right insofar as there is a small segment of it which is — in my opinion — too willing to condone cultural expressions which by their own political or ideological standards would have to be called misogynist or oppressive (e.g. female circumcision), with vague reference to “well, it’s their culture, it’s not necessarily understood the way we would understand it,” etc. But (1) those are in the minority, and (2) antyhing connected to islamism is definitely not given specially lenient treatment — on the contrary. And the “racism” argument has, as far as I recall, never been raised in this particular context.
The recent debacle with the Muhammed Cartoons in Denmark is a case in point: the Liberal Left was divided between those who thought that regardless of what political or religious sentiments we harbour, we (i.e. the newspaper which originally published the cartoons, Jyllands-Posten [incidentally same initials as Jerusalem Post…]) ought to have been more respectful, and those (including yours truly) who thought that freedom of expression is a legitimate weapon (non-violent, at that) against repression and death threats, and that that’s the important axis along which to judge this case.
The interesting thing about that matter is the story behind (and in front of) the publication: a children’s book author had wanted some illustrations to a book about Muhammed, but no illustrator dared put his/her name on the cover of such a book. The conservative Jyllands-Posten then invited all Danish cartoonists to contribute to a feature as a collective statement against the self-imposed oppression that came out of that fear. The rest is history — a history which confirms the fear, but also the need for a concerted reaction against the cause of that fear: dumb, fundamentalist islamism in its various violent incarnations.
Again: there has been criticism of the publication of the cartoons from the Liberal Left, but only based on a — flawed — idea of respect (the threat of violent retribution commands no respect, in my not-so-humble opinion), but never based on a charge of racism or anti-islamism.
Re. Neighbourhood Bully, my main objection to it is not that it’s a racist song, but that it’s a song that twists the truth. Personally, I wouldn’t necessarily call it a racist song, but a pile of neo-Zionist bullshit. It may reflect an understandable (if not justifiable) reposte to anti-semitic propaganda from the Arabic side — I don’t read Arabic well enough to have a well-founded opinion there — but that doesn’t mean that the majority of the rhetorical points he makes in the song are skewed at best and factually wrong at worst. Incidentally, that’s how it usually is when Dylan tries to be political (Hurricane and Joey come to mind — both brilliant songs, rhetorically speaking, and much better than NB, but factually dubious).
And then — phew — the obligatory antisemitism charge, again. I spoke to a friend today who had just had experienced a friend — another friend than me, mind you — reveal himself as an antisemite. “A Jew can’t be trusted.” “Can you explain to me how come all the Jews working in the WTC had a day off on 9/11?” — that kind of stuff. That in my book is anti-semitism. But I fail to see how any of the criticism of the politics of the state of Israel among the Liberal Left in the west could be called antisemitic. And you probably picked the worst possible case to prove your point: no Shylock stereotype in the world about the greedy, ruthless Jew can explain away the expulsion and subsequent “sorry, you’re not welcome back” policy that the state of Israel has been pursuing — openly — since 1948, whether we’re talking about the expulsion of 700,000 back then or the disgraceful “wall of annectation” and the no less disgraceful settlement policy in recent times.
It constantly puzzles me how many Isrealis conced that “I don’t agree with my coutry’s policy”, “this and that may have been wrong”, “that particular situation may not have been handled properly”, etc. and still wield the anti-semitism sword if someone else points out the same thing and acts upon it.
It’s also thoughtworthy how many of those concessions one can make without “connecting the dots” so to speak, and say “Hey, these are actually not small trifles but serious shit, and there are just too many things that are not ok; there is something wrong with the whole picture.”
Lastly, I don’t see the world delegitimizing the elected government of Israel. On the contrary: “the world” is holding you responsible for the choice you’ve made.
Oh, and about ethnic cleansing: I don’t think I need to repeat the argument there. Just google “ethnic cleansing israel” and read the first few hits.
@Lika: You make three false statements, which make it difficult to comment on the rest of your post. First, “the fact that when Israel does wrong, people attack its very right to exist.” How is that a fact, in the general sense that you seem to imply?
Second, “When people point out that the same [i.e. government lies and racism] is true for other countries, you somehow, astonishingly, find a way to deem that all irrelevant.” Well, yes, irrelevant for the Israel-Palestine issue. If you really mean that injustices in other parts of the world relieve Israel of its responsibility to act decently, or in some other mysterious way is directly relevant for this conflict, please tell me how. And don’t resort to simplistic “You may say ‘no, I’m not,’ but you are” logic. That’s just silly.
Third, “by participating in the one-sided pile-on, you’re contributing to the dehumanization of Jews. […] You are aligned with elements around the world who are drawing racist cartoons in Arab newspapers, and other such behavior.” So by criticizing Israeli policy, and entering into a state of “active non-communication” (and communicating quite a lot about it) I’m automatically aligned with everyone else who does something similar, and therefore have to answer for anything they say, do, or mean? Is that really what you’re saying?
Hi Eyolf , I have looked around your sites for an E-Mail address to contact you ,this seems the only way to contact you, I just wanted to say thanks to you for your Dylan site,I think it’s great and you’ve done a great job,it has been really helpful,all the best, Lou
Well Eyolf, your answer is interesting. Each time I read your comments, I am struck by two things. The first is your extensive research and knowledge. Most of it coming from Israeli and Arab resources. Do you speak Hebrew or Arabic? You must surely do. The second is your insistence in disregarding everything that does not comply with you point. You never (as far as I have seen), acknowledge a valid argument in favor of Israel. Maybe there are none…
Evidence of bias:
You say – but “Apartheid” is not what happened in South Africa (being an Afrikaans word and all…), It’s defined as something else, but knowing very well that this word in being used (as a “weapon”) in the media war because of It’s south African connection! It is used because it represents the “Black vs white”, hundreds of years of slave trading and repression and all that. That is the reason it is being used (By the way; all this forgetting that most Jews in Israel are from arab decent and that arabs themselves where avid slave traders). This conflict is not, will not be, and never was the “black vs white” issue – an issue the whole world agrees is a hideous mark on the human race. So you might “naively” say –” it’s just a label” – what a label it is!
And if so casually they put such a label on Israel, and then are surprised that they are regarded as unfair and bias in the conflict by Israelis – they are truly hypocrite.
But to answer your points:
1) Again – So Jews in exile are given citizenship. Everyone else – including you and your family, Americans, Japanese people, and Arab people can immigrate according to immigration law, like in every country in the world. The exception is for Jews not against Arabs. In the would be Palestinian state, I am sure Palestinians in exile would be able to get citizenship, but you and everyone else wont. Is that too racism?
2) This criticism is valid – as an inter-Israeli issue. Most countries in the world are having problems with ethnic minorities. If this index was applied to Denmark (which I presume is one of the most liberal states in the world), will you see equality in every aspect for minorities? And this when there is no territorial conflict. Imagine if there was one. Would they be very well integrated? So this needs to be viewed in context. I’ll also add that Israeli Arabs have far more rights including ownership of business and human rights then in most Arab countries in the world.
3) So – by your own words you acknowledge the difference in the way Israeli Arabs are treated and Palestinians. So this is NOT ethnic cleansing. It is NOT a racial thing. It is a territorial conflict – one where Palestinians should get a state in – but not at the expanse of a Jewish state.
Here is a point i think many israelis are trying to make:
The reason this territorial conflict is being made to be about race and ethnics is, in my eyes, a covert way to negate western society. Making this about cultures and making Israel out to be this Colonial evil, is making this insolvable, on purpose. This so that extreme Muslims have a means to rally the masses. So that oppressive regimes don’t have to answer internal human right issues inside Arabs stats. That iner-arab conflicts are subdued in totalitarian states (Kurds, Lebanon civil wars, Jordan’s western imposed ruling elite and so on). Is you look at interests – the ones with the most to gain from perpetuating the suffering and injustice of Palestinians are extreme Muslims and oppressive regimes. A two state solution to the Israeli-arab conflict is the worst thing that can happen to them.
By aiding this demonizing of Israel – e.g by supporting the view that Israel is in its core a way to immortalize western colonialism, you are in fact doing two things:
1) helping out extreme Muslim agendas
2) making a solvable situation unsolvable so that a state for Palestinians is not an option along side Israel but only instead of it.
words like “Aparthide” and “ethnic cleansing” are doing just that. also blocking me from your site (just kidding…).
Concerning the issues that I’ve discussed, no, you’re right: I haven’t come across “a valid argument in favor of Israel”. A lot of emotional arguments, a lot of quasi-moral arguments, a lot of flawed and manipulated arguments, a lot of hasbara drivel, and quite a lot about what good contribution to the world Israel has made (which is, frankly, quite irrelevant), but nothing concerning the matter at hand — the policy of the State of Israel and its abuse of power — that stands to closer scrutiny. By the way, in one of your mails you pointed out that I was mistaken about the proportion of the immigration from Europe/USA, and I acknowledged that. I don’t know if that counts as “in favour of Israel” — I don’t think so — but at least that ought to show that I’m not immune to counterarguments if they’re sound.
Now, about apartheid: I’ve never said nor indicated that the Israeli oppression has anything to do with “black/white”. If anything, those associations would be the main reason for me to prefer not to use the term “apartheid” in connection with Israel. But it is wrong to assert that that’s how it is defined. The crime of apartheid is defined by the 2002 Rome Statute of the International Criminal Court as inhumane acts “committed in the context of an institutionalized regime of systematic oppression and domination by one racial group over any other racial group or groups and committed with the intention of maintaining that regime.” Israeli-only roads, different laws for citizenship, land-ownership, and family matters, differences in educational system, health care, etc., based directly in the legal system and/or the official policy (and not just as the unfortunate outcome of social inequality in general), based exclusively on ethnic/religious/racial background — that for me meets the definition fairly well. Black and white is not an issue here. That the “exception is for Jews, not for Arabs”, as you so aptly put it, does not exactly disprove the inequality. Concerning your hypothesizing about the immigration laws of a future Palestinian state — well, you say you are “sure”, so I suppose I should take your word for it. And when you say that “Israeli Arabs have far more rights including ownership of business and human rights then in most Arab countries in the world”, are you then implying that they should be satisfied and glad that they are the happiest second-rate citizens in the world?
Re. 3): of course I acknowledge that the segregation is of a different kind and class within Israel and in the occupied territories, but that doesn’t mean (a) that everything is OK within Israel, or (b) that there is no ethnic cleansing. Historically, the argument that there was no ethnic cleansing doesn’t hold water, and your current deputy prime minister, Avi Lieberman has recently suggested that the Israeli Palestinians should be stripped of citizenship and relocated outside Israel’s future borders. Sounds like ethnic cleansing to me.
Concerning the last part of your argument, you’ll have to explain more clearly: (a) by what definition of “colonialism/colonializing” Israel is not a colonialist power (and based on what documentation you reach that conclusion); (b) what evidence you have to back your claim that “the ones with the most to gain from perpetuating the suffering and injustice of Palestinians are extreme Muslims and oppressive regimes” (unless you count Israel as one of those oppressive regimes, which I somehow doubt, although that would be closer to the truth); (c) how I’m aiding the demonizing of Israel, thereby helping out extreme Muslim agendas, by describing historical events that conform with stated and agreed-upon definitions of apartheid and ethnic cleansing (defined by the UN as “the planned deliberate removal from a specific territory, persons of a particular ethnic group, by force or intimidation, in order to render that area ethnically homogenous.”).
If you don’t: watch your back, or the horrible, antisemitic, ip-blocking monster will come and get you… :)
Me thinks this discussion is pointless… In retrospect I find my motivation in this argument was maybe questionable or even unfair. What did I want to see? I’m not sure. What reaction by you would have satisfied my sense of “justice”? What part did I want to play in this online mini-theater of reproach?
What do I know about you, your emotions and feelings, your experiences? I didn’t think in depth about all of this until now. As a non-poet once said, “I ain’t looking for you to feel like me, see like me or be like me” at lest not anymore… This was clearly a blind effort in my part – blind to you and more importantly blind to me.
Anyway you have a very clear and set view of things, I only hope that it serves you and others well, here and in the future.
I’d much rather talk to you about Dylan and ask your opinion on things I have pondered about. From what I read your analysis is pretty amazing. But I guess I’m under “academic boycott” and all, so I can’t, shame –maybe in another life…
I couldn’t read more than a couple of lines of one post without being appalled…
How can anyone be so naive as to think that being anti – “The actions of the ruling class of the state of Israel” = being anti – semitic?
How could, for example, a little British kid born in the last 30 – 40 years grow up anti – semitic.?
Anti – semetism for us as children meant a horror we could barely comprehend. We read about the holocaust and wept, we saw films and documentaries about it and heard about Anne Frank and realised that it could have happened to one of us and did happen to thousands upon thousands of others. We saw footage of ghettos and wondered why on earth anyone should single out Jews in this way.
Many went to live on Kibbutz.
Why, why why would you imagine that people born in such an environment in recent history would magically be anti – semitic? It does not make sense.
So if I congratulate and admire Eyolf Ostrem on his stance and wish that more people would do the same it has nothing to do with any prejudice.
Whether or not you agree on the initial implementation of a Zionist state in Palestine it is important to remember
1 – Other locations were initially discussed eg Argentina.
2 – The internationally agreed state (whether you agree with its implementation or not.) and the current one do not bare any similarity – you can google this. The map of the original state of Israel and the map of the current one are totally different and this is because Israel illegally invaded and sequestered land that did not belong to them. The U.N. resolution telling them to give it back is still current and has been for years.
Many countries rightly or wrongly went to war, for example, to overthrow the illegal invasion of Kuwait. Not to mention wars over invasions of Poland, France etc. All these people think they had a justification for invading these countries. Some Israelies find justification in their state’s activities – there isn’t any.
The Palestinian kids who are not allowed school books have done nothing to hurt Israelies.
If there is any analogy to be drawn from anti – semetism, W.W. II, the inhuman ghettoization of Jews it is not that supporting Palestinian victims of the inhuman blockade makes you anti – semitic.
It is that the state of Israel is behaving within our lifetime exactly like the Nazi state behaved.
No, that does not mean I condone terrorism. I don’t. But I don’t condone oppression, either.
The illegal occupation of Palestinian land is the evil that sparked the evil of terrorism and the single biggest issue in terms of ‘foreign affairs’ in the middle east. It is what recruited and recruits terrorists. It has thus sparked off terrible, destructive and unnecessary wars.
Those Palestinian children deprived of education, toys and unable to live in their own homeland will not be children for long.
Even if you condone Israel illegally and violently invading, occupying and populating land that is not theirs under the grounds that they feel threatened by Palestinians (who were not part even of the original International agreement to form a Zionist state on that particular land, not to mention the current not- Internationally sanctioned Invasion of their land.) it is counter productive – it is not just inhuman and immoral, It is self-defeating and stupid – as I said those kids will grow up and how do you think they will feel when they do?
By the way; if you live in a country whose T.V. channels and news programs are run by businessmen with vested business interests, you could be a victim of propaganda. These issues are easily researched. When you do so adequately you will see that the issue is not ‘complicated’ it is sadly and appallingly simple.
Well done Eyolf Ostrem when more people take a stand like you the intolerable status quo will end. As for disagreeing with it because you find the inconvenience of not being able to strum a few songs more important than the life and death of Palestinian human beings – what can I say?
I really haven’t decided about all this, but I find it quite interesting and would just like to observe one trend which seems to pop up through most of the argument above: each side insists upon characterizing and dismantling its opposition on its own terms, to which the response is always “no you didn’t understand the essence of my point,” and then the lines are redrawn. Here’s a suggestion for both sides: rather than shunning abstraction in order to validate your point with “real world” statistics (which are inherently weak since statistics only document trends, correlations, and coincidences to which counter-arguments and statistics which offer opposite evidence may always be found), embrace more theoretical political science and sustain your argument with more absolute logical processes. This would make the distinctions between the two sides clearer and cut to the heart of the issue faster.
I just want to ask why there is no acknowledgment that this “Palestine” everyone is talking about was “occupied” (using your words) from Egypt and Jordan…I mean, if that is the case, wouldn’t the logical action be to return Gaza to Egyptian rule and return West Bank to Jordanian rule?
Another question. This time I present a hypothetical scenario.
Let’s say, for a moment, that Israel backs off of Gaza and the blockade is ended. What, in your opinion, should Israel do IF Hamas begins shooting rockets into Israel?
As a follow up to my initial question, to whom should the land be returned. If not the Egyptians, maybe the British? if not the Brits, maybe the Turkish, or the Crusaders, or the Arabs from the Caliphates, or the Romans, or the Israelites from the bronze age?
I’m from Canada.
Should we return ALL the land to the Natives and get on boats and return to our ancestral countries?
Well, I kinda did, coming back to Israel…
You should know that I hope for a solution that will find the Arabs living in Gaza living healthy lives full of all the human rights I come to expect for myself.
@AnObserver: I’m not sure if you’re serious with your questions, but if you are: (a) the only relevant state formations prior to 1948 to “return” the territory to would be the Ottoman Empire, which doesn’t exist anymore. The territories were never British as such, but administrative mandates under British rule “until such time as they are able to stand alone”, in the words of the League of Nations. Egypt had control of the area for ten years in the nineteenth century, but only as the result of conquest and hence not legitimate by modern principles, and Jordan didn’t exist as a country until 1946. In other words: there is no-one to return it to — other than the people who lived there (until they were expelled). (b) the main reason why the question is irrelevant is that no state has made such a claim to it. This includes the Caliphates (which don’t exist anymore), the Crusaders (who, luckily, don’t exist anymore either), and the Romans (who frankly ought to be more concerned about their football team than about 1500-years-old foreign policy). And, for that matter, the Israelites of the bronze age, who likewise don’t exist anymore. (c) Your question about how to treat the indigenous populations of the Americas is too serious to be treated in the polemical manner you do. (d) You ask: “What should Israel do IF [Israel backs off of Gaza and] Hamas begins shooting rockets into Israel?” Well, first: take the lesson from Northern Ireland: once the opression stopped, so did the violent reaction to it. If that doesn’t work, bring the matter before the international community. It hasn’t helped the Palestinians much, but it’s worth a try. If that doesn’t work, go to war — against the military units responsible for the trespassing, not against civilians.
Hello I was recently introduced to this site and found it very helpful. I also want to say that at least for me, music distracts and helps me cope with problems. No matter what kind of problem it is, from something as stupid as my national football team losing, to a broken heart, to injustices in the world, it just all seems to fade away when I strum my guitar. That is why I do not want to condone or oppose the boycott. I think we should all just “keep on keeping on” in the words of Bob Dylan. (Tangled Up in Blue- Blood on the Tracks)
Aside from that I would like to congratulate Mr. Ostrem for such a detailed and complete website, by the far the best Dylan chord reference I have found on the whole internet. And wow your knowledge of the English language is rivaled only by your knowledge of music theory and Bob Dylan, which I suppose is rare given that you are probably of Scandinavian origin.
But please could you also start including some of “The Band” music in this website? You probably know all about them. But as great as they were I have found very little of their music tabbed. Especiallly one song that I am dying to play, called “Further on Up the Road” performed with Eric Clapton from “The Last Waltz” album.
Cheers, and keep up the good work
@Velazquez: I’ve actually considered the Band, but there is already a quite excellent site with chords to all the Band songs. There are cases there where I’d have liked to see more detail and transcriptions more geared towards the middle road between showing what sounds are heard and how they are produced, but on the whole, I think it’s good.
Hey man, i’ve loved your site for years. Thanks for doing such a great job.
But i gotta say I don’t see what good this is going to do. Israel needs more Dylan music, not less.
Eyolf, I’ve not checked in for a while and I see you have really stirred up the hornet’s nest this time. Well done friend. Passions get sooo inflamed around these issues I’m not surprised at the huge response you have received. The events of the blockade are faded from the headlines now and much of the anger caused by your brave stance seems to be fading with them. I’d like to just make a few observations though.
Between Hamas and Israel there is plenty of blame and responsibilty for bad acts to go around. Neither side can really be moraly justified for many of their actions. Israel, as a democracy, might aspire to promote freedom and justice for all, sadly they fail at that. One of the toughest things about being free is being willing to grant freedom to others and both sides are failing on that account.
The world moves on and many of the social constructs which have worked well in the past no longer serve in this age. The time for theocratic states is probably behind us. The loud voices opposed to “islamo-fascism” can no doubt see the truth in that. Israel may argue that as a democracy they don’t fall into this catagory but I maintain that that is intelectually dishonest, Zionism is a religious movement and still holds the reigns of power in Israel. Until a more moderate and modern thinking voice can gain power there these conflicts are bound to continue. I’m not argueing that Israel should not exist but that it needs to seriously re-think its’ position, many in Gaza have been denied justice merely because they happen to have been born in the wrong place at the wrong time. Israel was formed by the forcible relocation of people from places where they lived for generations. A little acknowledgement of their plight is long overdue.
I hope that Israel will show leadership in the region by working to advance true freedom and justice for all, that probably means no new, and the dismantleing of Jewish settlements in the occupied territories and an end to the cruel and barbaric economic blockade. Whether or not they have the meddle to stand firm and not answer evil and violence with more of the same (they too are victims let’s remember) remains to be seen.
Congratulations on your great site.
DW
Eyolf,
My first question was rhetorical – I know that all those groups don’t exist anymore…
You say simply give it to “the people who lived there (until they were expelled)” – I’m left wondering if you mean the Arabs living in the area, or the Jews who were expelled 2000 years ago?
Or is there a statute of limitations on land claims?
I did not mean to trivialize the situation of Native Americans, but only wanted to draw a connection.
I went to university in Canada. In university there were many “anti-israel” demonstrations put on by the different Palestinian rights groups on campus.
I always thought about the chutzpah they have to live and prosper in a country that subjugates its own Natives and at the same time speak-out about what’s going on in Gaza.
If the situation would be described in a political cartoon it would depict a slave driver, whip in hand, talking to one of his slaves about how terrible slavery is.
I’m not trying to say “injustice exists, live with it” – I think that Israel needs to do more for the people in Gaza. BUUUUUUUUUT we can’t forget that the people of Gaza (who elected Hamas) want to destroy Israel. So the very real problem is: Israel needs to help a group of people that will use that help to kill them.
What is the solution?
I don’t know how Israel can help them and still protect themselves.
This article does a really good job of explaining the problem and how the international community is treating Israel with a double standard: http://www.washingtonpost.com/wp-dyn/content/article/2010/06/03/AR2010060304287.html
You implied that if Israel were to just end “oppression” everything would be OK – do you actual believe that?
I mean the oppression by the Arabs began against Israel when they were just a fledgling nation and were the weaker group.
Why do you think that whatever borders we agree to that history won’t repeat itself and that the Palestinians won’t attack for all of Israel?
ALSO – when talking about returning to the original borders, why do you seem to forget that the borders changed in war – and a defensive war at that (I say defensive knowing full well that Israel attacked preemptively in the Six Day War – it was still obviously defensive). The surrounding nations wanted to drive Israel into the sea – that means kill them!
So there was a war – and one side lost (I’ll call them the bad guys – I know that is my bias…). Shouldn’t they live with their mistake?
OK – now to another topic. I’d like to put forth the idea that Zionism is not a purely religious act, but a cultural one. I am Jewish however I have no religion. So that means that I’m culturally Jewish, but don’t don a Kippah and Talit to pray to the god of Abraham (I think gods are just glorified ghosts…neither exist).
BUUUUT I would have been killed in the Holocaust and Pogroms or any other attacks on Jews just the same, even though I do not describe myself as religiously Jewish (a religious Jew would, but I don’t really care what they say). So I need the State of Israel to protect my rights.
I know these days people roll their eyes and say that the Holocaust excuse is moot and deny the existence of Antisemitism – but nobody thought that something like that could happen 60 years ago either…I’d rather not take the chance, thank you very much.
So we need to have a solution.
We need people to start singing in the streets for peace.
They need to be singing in Israel and Gaza.
This is going to have to be a grassroots movement.
Israelis will have to give charity to Gazans – show them, through love and peace, that we want them to live with us as partners in continuing the success story of Israel.
Gazans will have to fight the terrorists amongst them.
One side cannot/will not do anything alone. Israel cannot stop as long as Gazans won’t stop – and vice versa.
I think that the music of Bob Dylan can only help bring that dream to fruition.
I will sing in the streets – I will sing about the end of war – but I don’t know the chords…
Can you help me?
People are asking what good Eyolf will do by blocking access.
A lot if more people do the same. If just one person who has a website sees what he has done and thinks “Yes, I too hate the suffering, mental and physical, that the blockade is inflicting. I will also block access.” And another person sees what this website holder has done and so on, then the attention of the world gets focussed on this injustice and something is done about it.
Similar questions were asked about boycotts on South African products. Now the former apartheid leaders as well as the current administration freely acknowledge these activities had a massive contribution to the ending of apartheid.
John, you talk about sides. I am not on any side. I don’t live in the U.S. with its massively influential pro-Israel community, or in Israel where obviously there is also partiality.
I’m not on any side. This is the opinion of people who are totally unbiased, have no vested interests in the region and are solely interested in what is right.
You wouldn’t say those who were appalled by apartheid were on a side, would you? As though it meant they wanted to join the A.N.C. or something. You wouldn’t say someone who was against the holocaust was on a side, would you?
The people who protest around the world against the blockade and illegal invasion of Palestinian land and settlement in those peoples homes. (1967 not 1948.) Are not ‘A bunch of Arabs’ : 2 of them were on the British news a moment ago – they were Oxford University graduates. Others include all kinds of respected academics, not to mention the United Nations (With a resolution like the one telling Saddam Hussein to get out of Kuwait.) and most European and national governments.
You talk about people using erroneous statistics, but the invasion of 1967 and the global outrage to it and its ramifications, the maps which show the difference between the ’48 Israel and the post ’67 Israel, the goods which Palestinians are not allowed etc etc etc these are not a matter of conjecture these are all extremely well documented by historians of all ethnic backgrounds from all over the world.
There is no partially to my posts, why would there be? This is merely a reaction against injustice and a support for the oppressed, which all those of us who have no axe to grind about it would feel for ANY oppressed minority, whether from Palestine or any other place in the world.
It is also worth, I think, giving a special mention to those Israelies who are brave and impartial enough to also abhor and protest against this injustice.
Eyolf is doing something. Evil can only flourish when there is non-resistance to evil… surely it is better if this resistance is non-violent – Gandhi’s way?
…and as far as I can see, people may not be happy about it, but he has gone to the trouble of setting up the website – it’s up to him who has access to it, isn’t it? I mean he can’t have anything to gain by this personally… as I said, this is how IMPARTIAL people feel who are not on any side and not preached to by pro – Israel businessmen, politicians and press.
Richard, I just want to point out that it is incorrect to say “this is how IMPARTIAL people feel.”
You may have no vested interest and therefore are “impartial” but other people with no vested interest and are impartial can sympathize with a Israel’s right to protect itself from an organization that wants to attack them.
It’s just not fair to say you’re opinion, as an impartial person in the situation, is the only opinion an impartial person can have…
And regarding your statement, “Evil can only flourish when there is non-resistance to evil…” well, Israel believes (and there is strong precedent as to why…) that if they did not monitor the goods flowing into Gaza than an Evil (re: Hamas) would flourish…so they resist.
Should Israel employ non-violent Resistance?
I wonder what that would look like…the blockade will be dropped and Hamas will get weapons from Iran and Syria and who knows where else (maybe Turkey now…) start bombing Israeli cities and civilians, then what?
Maybe they won’t get weapons. Maybe they’ll change their Charter. I don’t think Israel should have to take that risk.
Some key points from the Hamas Charter from 1988:
– They say that any land conquered by force by a Muslim will forever be a Muslim Waqf (basically that they call the right of that land forever and Allah agrees with them).
– Then they go on to say: “Peaceful Solutions, [Peace] Initiatives and International Conferences: [Peace] initiatives, the so-called peaceful solutions, and the international conferences to resolve the Palestinian problem, are all contrary to the beliefs of the Islamic Resistance Movement. For renouncing any part of Palestine means renouncing part of the religion;” (because this Islamic conquered land is Waqf…)
-AND FINALLY, to prove that it has nothing to do with Israel taking Gaza, and any post ’67 borders, article seven of their Charter states: “Hamas has been looking forward to implement Allah’s promise whatever time it might take. The prophet, prayer and peace be upon him, said: The time will not come until Muslims will fight the Jews (and kill them); until the Jews hide behind rocks and trees, which will cry: O Muslim! there is a Jew hiding behind me, come on and kill him! This will not apply to the Gharqad, which is a Jewish tree”
So, 1: Muslims took over the land 2: it is therefore the religious duty of a Muslim wage war over that land. 3: Jews need to be killed by Muslims.
Does this sound like a group that would be affected by non-violent resistance?
I don’t think so.
But I may not be so impartial…
Richard, do you think that Israel can rely on non-violent resistance against Hamas? Eyolf? Anyone?
And I only came by to learn “Senor (Tales of Yankee Power)”…
The leaders of Israel when the country was set up did not abide by the UN resolutions that partitioned Palestine into Jewish and Arab states. Terrible crimes have been perpetrated by both sides, but the current blockades aren’t working and only cause more opposition in the West Bank and Gaza Strip.
Israel needs to act like the mature democracy it wants to be, and allow the rule of law to become established. The deaths of Israeli citizens that this may cause is terrible, but death is the very nature of war, and it is still a war.
@ Eyolf Ostrem: Well could you please give the link to the Band website?
Also I’m a little bit disappointed that you don’t include some lead guitar parts in many of the songs. For example, the opening parts of the song “You’re a Big Girl Now” from the album Blood on the Tracks. I know the essential part of learning the song are the chords but I also love playing the small bits like that. Those 3 or 4 guitars that play the opening riffs are some of the most beautiful sounds I have ever heard. Another example would be the main riff on “Tangled Up in Blue” that I have not found anywhere. I even bought a small book that includes most songs by Bob Dylan and it also only includes the chords.
I don’t understand how one boycott can legitimize another. Trying to solve a conflict by merely punishing one party in a conflict is not very effective. Israel is not the only one doing bad things here, but everyone seems to think that.
Perhaps because you got it all wrong:
1. What Israel is doing in Gaza is not a boycott — a private decision of non-communication — but a blockade — a deprieval of basic human needs, enforced by violent means, against international agreements and regulations.
2. You’re implying that this is a conflict between equals. I’ve used the image of the schoolyard bully before, and I claim — based on my own knowledge of the situation, as well as that of many whose knowledge of the situation is far more nuanced and thorough than my own (even the neo-fascist historian Benny Morris, whose knowledge of the atrocities committed by Israel is unsurpassed, but who still manages the reach the conclusion that it’s OK) — that that’s a far more accurate metaphor than the one you suggest. Now, if I witness a “schoolyard bully” beating up a kid, who, while he’s receiving a round of punches to his stomach manages to kick the bully on the leg — would you say that I should punish them both equally?
3. “Everyone” is not thinking that Israel is the only one doing bad things, but some people think that what Israel is doing is so bad that it calls for a reaction.
The image of the schoolyard bully is wrong, simply because it implies that the violence would seize if Israel stopped the blockade. Hamas is in power in Gaza, and surely wouldn’t stop attacking Israel until it seized to exist. (See AnObserver’s last post)
Also, why do you assume that just because one power is stronger than another, it automatically has a higher degree of responsibility in a conflict both started?
I don’t believe being hypocritical is the solution to a conflict, do you? Do unto thers as you would have them do unto you…
Re: kicking the bully in the leg and equal punishment.
And yet, you acknowledge that there are far worse crimes being committed by nations all over the globe, but still choose to only boycott Israel.
There used to be many reasonable Israelis debating this with you, but you’ve scared them all off. Pretty soon there won’t be any people left here except those who agree with you.
Bob Dylan himself is a Zionist. How does that make you feel as you transliterate his music?
Eyolf,
I want to build on your story about the bully and the kid.
However there is a bit of a back-story you’ve left out.
A generation ago, the bullies father was just a little kid looking for a nice sandbox in the playground. All of a sudden, every bully in school beat up on him and wanted to kill him by dunking his head in the toilet until he drowns. Somehow he managed to survive.
Now the weak kid had children and they are not weak.
And the children of the bullies are weak, but they have a memory of being strong and they want that power to wedgie and swerlie the new kid again…
Now, it’s afternoon recess and you came to see what’s going on…maybe you’re the school inspector…or some kind of parent run safety group…You see the “bullies” beating up the “weaker” kids. So you ban the bullies from using your website.
The problem is you weren’t paying attention during first recess when the “weak” kids built rockets and fired at the bullies.
and you don’t pay attention when the weak kids strap bombs to themselves and blow up the bully’s families…
Metaphors are fun, aren’t they?
I was talking to my fiend who made a great point – we all want to side with the underdog. It’s a visceral response. No-one wants like to see a stronger person picking on a weaker person. But sometimes that underdog is just an asshole and when the bully leaves him alone, he’s just going to stab him in the back laughing like a lunatic.
The point is that being an underdog does not provide a moral high ground or warrant support if their actions as an underdog are still wrong.
Moving on, what do you think about woman’s rights or Gay/Lesbian rights in Arab countries?
How about another hypothetical. So Israel goes back to the pre 6-day war borders, Gaza is run by a militant and terrorist group that has fundamentalist interpretations of Islam. IF (he says very very sarcastically) it turns out that the humanitarian crisis for women, gay and lesbians, or people of other religions comes through, like it has in other Arab countries, are you going to fight for their rights?
I know…I know, you have to pick your battles, and decided that fighting Israel, is the battle you picked…BUT, it’s pretty much the same people you’re fighting for…right? Half the Palestinian population…
Anyway, I was just wondering…
Thank you for reading this.
I’ve been following the discussions on your site for quite some time. At first I thought you were just ignorant ans influenced by the media. I am now quite convinced that you are very educated about the situation.
Therefore, I must conclude that you are ant-semitic. Maybe not in the ‘Jews kill christian kids to make Matzos’ way, you just apply ‘special’ standards when judging behaviour by jews and then ‘punish’ them when they don’t comply.
Both my parents are from European countries and had to live with this kind of treament by ‘non-antisemics’ like you.
Boycotting Israel ( only ) and saying your actions are not directed towrds jews is really ridicullos. Do yourself a favor and remove that comment from your boycott page. who are you kidding ( yourself maybe ? )
Thank you. At least, there are people that understand Justice. I hope Bob Dylan thinks the same, now. Cheers from Lebanon.
i’m not in favour of blocking anyone
i love this site and will continue to use and appreciate it…very much…i want everyone to have that open to them, regardless of what their politicos do
so i went to find a quote to support what i was trying to say, and see the lyrics to neighbourhood bully have been taken down?
wow…maybe i need to look at myself if that’s where i go for a quote
or maybe someone needs to take a better look at things
dylanchords inches one step closer towards foxnews…not close, but closer…fucking swell
Eyolf wrote:
“What should Israel do IF [Israel backs off of Gaza and] Hamas begins shooting rockets into Israel?” Well, first: take the lesson from Northern Ireland: once the opression stopped, so did the violent reaction to it. If that doesn’t work, bring the matter before the international community. It hasn’t helped the Palestinians much, but it’s worth a try. If that doesn’t work, go to war — against the military units responsible for the trespassing, not against civilians”
as far as I remember Israel has already been down that road:
– Israel pulled out of Gaza, Gaza violence (rockets to south of Israel) only got worse. looks like the northern Ireland model does not work for the middle east.
– International community…are you serious? do you really think the UN will ask politely to stop firing rockets and Hamas will comply?
– go to war against military units & not against civilians, unfortunately (and I think you know this judging by your knowledge of the conflict) these military units are operating as civilians and out of civilian homes and institutes.
Complying with the suggested “code of ethics” basically deprives Israel of any right to self defense (was that the intention?).
also since you clearly acknowledge the numerous conflicts and wrongdoings around the world, could you share the reason you chose to fight this one?
It is an interesting act of censorship of access that you have decided to institute here. Just the other day I was in Washington, DC at the Newseum. There is a huge map on the wall showing the state of freedom of the press throughout the world. In Asia, it shows just four countries with total freedom of the press: three were PacRim countries. The entire Asian landmass was marked with either yellow or red showing restrictions in varying degree. The ONLY OTHER COUNTRY with freedom of the press in green was Israel. Then again, it is the only democracy in the entire Middle East.
Israel is not perfect. No government or state is. But you are not boycotting the products of a state or a government. You are hypocritically guilty of the same type of “collective punishment” of people not involved with much less responsible for the policies that clearly bother many concerned for peace in the Middle East. Further you alienate the people most sympathetic to a political solution to the Palestinian issue. I have many Israeli friends. Most of them appreciate that the Palestinian people will reject violence only when they can replace it with hope, and therefore are supportive of a secure and responsible State of Palestine. I’ve yet to hear any Palestinian voices affirm the obverse. Perhaps they are afraid of reprisals from Hamas. I certainly would be if I were them. But even so, you betray a bias that exacerbates contempt for “the other” instead of helping to pave a road to peace.
I will miss the valuable content of this site, but nonetheless I will not be back until your misguided efforts are rescinded. I cannot in good conscious offer even the appearance of tacit support or approval of someone who creates obstacles to peace, all in the name of promoting peace. I wish you the opportunity to visit Israel and Palestine, and to see where thousands of rockets landed in the southern communities before Cast Lead was initiated; I wish for you to see the tunnels that smugglers have used to bring weapons—not butter, but just guns–into Gaza; to see how many Fatah supporters in Gaza are denied access to the tons of clearly non-military and non-dual usage goods that made it into the Strip via Israel each and every day of the blockade because they are not Hamas. I wish you the chance to see where the peace community actually does exist throughout Israel. In the meantime, I will find my Bob elsewhere.
Eyolf, I’m interested in your thoughts on the previous few statements.
Where’d you go?
Many unsubstantiated statements and inconsistencies in Professor Davidson’s article; I don’t know whether to laugh or cry. Just to pick out a couple:
“…What the Zionists refuse to acknowledge is that the place their mythology makes special for them, is also special to a lot of other folks based on other interpretations of the same myth and other forms of oral and written tradition as well…”
Clearly, not all Zionists manifest this refusal. The blanket assertion is false. You have tried to hold people to high standards of logical consistency and fact-based argument in this blog. I submit that Davidson deserves the same.
Also, the Zionist connection to Israel is not based solely on “mythology” but also on the reality of a continuous presence intermingled with periods of banishment, hostility, diaspora, etc. There are certainly many religious sorts who say that “it’s ours because God gave it to us.” But in total, the pro-Israel thrust rests on history and the UN partition. Not God.
Errors of commission and omission by Davidson.
Plus which, there is a reciprocal refusal by many on the other side. I do not want to drag you into the black hole of “reciprocity” and “why don’t you also…” again. That question has been asked and answered. I simply note that the issue seems to keep coming up.
“…Second, one can argue that just because other nations behave badly does not let the Israelis off the hook. After all, the Israelis now have the dubious distinction of running the longest post-WWII occupation in the world. There is no reason why boycott supporters should not start with the problem that has persisted longest and then work backwards…”
One can, and certainly SHOULD, argue that the misdeeds of others do not let Israel off the hook. We can agree that any pro-Israeli argument that “we can do it because they did it” is worthy of contempt.
But, the pro-Israel argument isn’t that Israel should be let off the hook because it is “no worse than some others”. Rather, the plea has been that the (seemingly) selective focus by the left on Israel is an illustration of why Israel feels that it does not have a fair world forum in which to operate. I am not actually making that argument myself at this time because it brings us back to the aforementioned black hole; I’m just correcting what I felt was an extremely sloppy characterization of the Zionist position by Davidson.
Also, while this may be the longest post-WWII occupation (I’ll assume it is for argument’s sake), I suspect that it’s not the longest post-WWII political injustice, generally; nor the most severe (depending on the definition and metric). Instead of starting at the front and working your way back, why not start at the top and work your way down?
But, whatever. It’s a person’s right to start wherever they want, as long as it’s an essentially decent starting place.
Which brings me back to you. You have said that you recognize bad behavior by both sides, yet feel that it is appropriate to use different tools for different situations. Therefore, Israel is boycotted and others are not. In your view, as I understand it, Israel is the party that is in power in the West Bank and Gaza, and so logically they must move first. If this is your view, then, while I don’t love it, it is sufficiently logically consistent for me and does not need to be defended. It rests on an specific assertion, but you’ve stated this assertion, and so anyone who wants to argue with you is free to evaluate your assertion and proceed from there.
Generally, things that are logically consistent are deemed to be free from bias. But, while you present your views in a consistent way, I cannot shake the feeling that there is a general bias in your posts and in Davidson’s article. I cannot get over the issue of selective focus. And that doesn’t make me a defender of everything Israel does. And it doesn’t make me incapable of criticizing Israel. And it doesn’t make me assume that you’re anti-semetic. It just makes me a little sad.
Great initiative.
This is a truly creative way to raise debate over an issue which is so dire and acute. Both the israeli and the palestinian people deserve better than the current catastrophic situation created by far-right nationalists in the Israeli cabinet.
Of course, Hamas are, generally speaking, a bunch of religious fanatics, but that does NOT justify the way palestinians are being treated today!
Let me say, first, that I don’t suspect you of anti-Semitism. A site devoted to Dylan, among other things, pretty much clears you of that charge. On the other hand, you must realize that by singling out Israel — instead of concentrating on nations that are infinitely more brutal — you are aiding and abetting anti-Semites. And this should give you pause. The Jews are unique, yes — but certainly not in the history of brutality (except, of course, as the victims). In the developed world, the urge to single out Israel is most virulent, these days, among the educated — and especially among academics; hence, it should be possible to hold this tendency up to the light of reason. And you are clearly a reasonable man, so I hope you’ll give the following words some thought. I’m going to quote Olive Schreiner, the South African novelist, who puts this better than most:
“Indeed it is difficult for all other nations of the world to live in the presence of the Jews. It is irritating and most uncomfortable. The Jews embarrass the world as they have done things which are beyond the imaginable. They have become moral strangers since the day their forefather, Abraham, introduced the world to high ethical standards and to the fear of Heaven. They brought the world the Ten Commandments, which many nations prefer to defy. They violated the rules of history by staying alive, totally at odds with common sense and historical evidence. They outlived all their former enemies, including vast empires such as the Romans and the Greeks. They angered the world with their return to their homeland after 2000 years of exile and after the murder of six million of their brothers and sisters.
“They aggravated mankind by building, in the wink of an eye, a democratic State which others were not able to create in even hundreds of years. They built living monuments such as the duty to be holy and the privilege to serve one’s fellow men.
“They had their hands in every human progressive endeavor, whether in science, medicine, psychology or any other discipline, while totally out of proportion to their actual numbers. They gave the world the Bible and even their ‘savior.’
“Jews taught the world not to accept the world as it is, but to transform it, yet only a few nations wanted to listen. Moreover, the Jews introduced the world to one God, yet only a minority wanted to draw the moral consequences. So the nations of the world realize that they would have been lost without the Jews… And while their subconscious tries to remind them of how much of Western civilization is framed in terms of concepts first articulated by the Jews, they do anything to suppress it.
“They deny that Jews remind them of a higher purpose of life and the need to be honorable, and do anything to escape its consequences. It is simply too much to handle for them, too embarrassing to admit, and above all, too difficult to live by.
“So the nations of the world decided once again to go out of ‘their’ way in order to find a stick to hit the Jews. The goal: to prove that Jews are as immoral and guilty of massacre and genocide as some of they themselves are.
“All this in order to hide and justify their own failure to even protest when six million Jews were brought to the slaughterhouses of Auschwitz and Dachau; so as to wipe out the moral conscience of which the Jews remind them, and they found a stick.
“Nothing could be more gratifying for them than to find the Jews in a struggle with another people (who are completely terrorized by their own leaders) against whom the Jews, against their best wishes, have to defend themselves in order to survive. With great satisfaction, the world allows and initiates the rewriting of history so as to fuel the rage of yet another people against the Jews. This in spite of the fact that the nations understand very well that peace between the parties could have come a long time ago, if only the Jews would have had a fair chance. Instead, they happily jumped on the wagon of hate so as to justify their jealousy of the Jews and their incompetence to deal with their own moral issues.
“When Jews look at the bizarre play taking place in The Hague, they can only smile as this artificial game once more proves how the world paradoxically admits the Jews uniqueness. It is in their need to undermine the Jews that they actually raise them.
“The study of history of Europe during the past centuries teaches us one uniform lesson: That the nations which received and in any way dealt fairly and mercifully with the Jew have prospered; and that the nations that have tortured and oppressed them have written out their own curse.”
———————-
I am writing this because I admire your site, and I recommended it to a Dylan-obsessed friend: a famous writer, and famous in particular as a left-liberal academic. Her response was much less temperate than mine, but you should realize that this is how your choice affects many people who would otherwise admire what you’ve done here: “Jeeezus, or should I say Jehovah — the Stockholm Dylanologist is blocking Israel and so proud of himself — fuck him.”
My sense is that Bob Dylan’s own response would be similar, frankly. It is in fact perverse to single out the greatest living Jewish poet for praise, while simultaneously singling out his homeland for damnation.
@Douglas: Let me get this straight: you don’t suspect me of anti-Semitism, but you spend the rest of your post on an extensive quotation from one of the most ridiculous piles of emotional and unsubstantiated BS I’ve read in a long time in these threads, which talks of the Jews, not the state of Israel, and which gives the Jews a special place in the consciousness of the world, not because of how they act, but just because they’re Jews, rounding it off with an apocalyptic reference to the hand of God, giving those who treat Jews badly their just punishment. I.e., that article moves the discussion precisely to the field where one might talk about Semitism/anti-Semitism.
Then you round the whole thing off by hiding behind someone else insulting me, and, as the last nail in the coffin, you call me perverse because I “single out the greatest living Jewish poet for praise, while simultaneously singling out his homeland for damnation.” (Here’s the thing: Dylan’s homeland is the USA, and that he’s Jewish is completely irrelevant for this site, which is about his music-making.)
So, your point is that I’m not anti-Semitic but perverse, is that it?
Eyolf,
Thanks for the measure, such an invading country that doesn’t allow food to be given to its neighbour doesn’t deserve respect.
“So, your point is that I’m not anti-Semitic but perverse, is that it?”
That’s the most generous interpretation, yes.
To quote the same author: “What got me most agitated was the sly way he left the door open for Israelis to crawl to him individually to present their urgent personal appeals for entry. That’s straight out of the Holocaust book.”
This is a real problem when it comes to academic anti-Zionism — some of it is genuinely well-intentioned. Not much of it, but there are people — intelligent, educated people — who hate Israel, but don’t in fact have a problem with Jews. I was giving you credit for being one of them, so yes: I was cloaking what I really suspect in the words of another writer.
Certainly I can understand how a liberal academic would have serious problems with the Netanyahu administration. I’m no fan myself. But to conflate the administration of a democracy with the people of that country is, as I say, suspect. I despised George Walker Bush, for instance, but I would never have suggested that America should be banished from the company of nations because they happened to elect a loathsome man. And Netanyahu is just another unpleasant rightwing politico: he’s not remotely in the same league as butchers like Mugabe, or Ahmadinejad, or Kim Jong Il.
Yet you decide to hate his country. Even if a huge proportion of Israeli citizens disagrees with him: Israel itself must be condemned.
That’s where you become suspect. You think that you’ve adequately addressed the issue of why you are banning Israel, alone among nations. You haven’t, however — because, quite simply, you can’t. I’m fairly sure you never banned American citizens under Bush. My guess is that I could access your site from Zimbabwe or North Korea. There is something about Israel in particular that gets under your skin: the sole democracy in the region. The only country that guarantees freedom of worship to its enemies. The only country to have laws against torture.
This last fact is worth addressing: Yes, Israeli laws against torture are more rigorous than America’s. The laws do get broken, as they do in the US (and, I imagine, Sweden) — but the law of the land is unambiguous: “Sometimes a democracy must fight with one hand tied behind its back.” (Aharon Barak – President of the Israel Supreme Court).
This is the country you choose to single out for hatred. While they’re busy stoning women for adultery next door.
But let’s continue to assume that your problem is with Israel — not with Jews. Here’s where things get tricky. You’re an academic. A musicologist, fine — but you can’t plead complete ignorance of political history. And anyone who teaches at the college level in Europe — whether it’s music or literature or engineering — is intimately aware of 20th-century European history. So you’re welcome to argue that Jews have no right to special consideration — that their circumstance is precisely the same as everyone else’s — but that argument is suspect when it comes from an educated European. You’re welcome to argue that a nation founded as a response to the Holocaust is just the same as any other political entity. Again, however: there’s something suspicious here.
I understand that Europeans in particular don’t like to be reminded of their own nations’ culpability in the Holocaust, but since we’re roundly condemning entire nations for the acts of certain individuals, let’s examine this. The sheer depth of your anger in response to my suggestion that some nations might have blood on their hands caused me to do a bit of research.
I’ll be honest: I always assumed that the Swedish behaved impeccably during the Second World War. The stories of Sweden opening its borders to Jewish refugees from Denmark are famous. The overwhelming hospitality of Swedish citizens towards the dispossessed is celebrated for a reason.
So I never thought to look into why Denmark is celebrated as one of the “Righteous Among Nations,” but Sweden is not:
http://www.thelocal.se/6214/20070126/
I assure you, I bear no animosity towards Sweden. Nor towards much more culpable nations. In fact, unlike you, I tend not to tar entire nations with a single brush. Nevertheless, suddenly it’s not so surprising that an academic from Stockholm might be outraged by an argument that “gives the Jews a special place in the consciousness of the world, not because of how they act, but just because they’re Jews.” I can see how you’d be particularly angered by “an apocalyptic reference to the hand of God, giving those who treat Jews badly their just punishment.”
I wouldn’t worry too much: if the guilty nations of this earth were to be smitten by God, Sweden would be pretty low on the list. Israel, of course, would be lower (since Israeli scientific institutions — unlike yours — have never been “leaders in the fields of race biology and eugenic research.” See linked article above). And not to worry — I’m not going to block Swedes from visiting my web site, even if I now know that the country “introduced immigration laws which turned away asylum seekers from Germany, many of whom were later murdered in concentration camps.”
Why am I not going to do this? Because I don’t believe that Sweden in the 21st century — even if has never properly come to terms with its history — deserves to be saddled with the guilt of prior generations (however recent). And I especially don’t believe that individual Swedes — the decent, hospitable, heroic people who welcomed Jewish refugees — deserve to be tarred with the same brush as Nazi sympathizers in their administration. Nor do I feel that today’s Swedes deserve to have their names blackened, en masse, by association with anti-Semites in the academy.
In short: there are nations, and there are individual people. There is history, and there is the erasure of history. And there is a tremendous amount of guilt to go around. Full disclosure: I was born in Canada, another country that turned away Jewish refugees. A country that has an abysmal history when it comes to the treatment of its indigenous people: worse even the Swedish treatment of the Sami people.
(I am not sure, in fact, why Sweden — which has been in general exemplary when it come to supporting civil rights legislation at the UN — hasn’t ratified ILO Convention 169 regarding the rights of indigenous peoples. I guess there’s some concern that international law would require you to set up a separate Sami state. Frankly, I think this is a misinterpretation: even though these people occupied the land long before you did, I don’t think Sweden could be forced to adopt a two-state solution.)
So, yes, I come from a country with blood on its hands, and blood at the foundations. Even so, I am not going to recommend that Canada be made an international pariah. I shall continue to allow Canadians — and Swedes — to visit my web site.
Hi Eyolf,
Maybe it is time for new thread, the sit has fallen out the pants of this one.
hey man can you please tab the song Two good man by Woody Guthrie. I’ ve played all your songs, i mean your chords of dylan songs and i still cant get the chords of the single song by myself! :) so please make an exeption and just put those few sentences that will make me happy. (i think it in a# yes, no?=