Dear Israel Lobby, We Give Up

[American Dream]

Well, I'm for abolishing the Fed. And I'm not for killing gays.

The first seems like common sense; the second would be suicidal.

I'm definitely for major financial reforms and have no sympathy for the Federal Reserve at all. However, I do think that infiltration of Far Right ideas and movements into the world of conspiracy research and popular activism deserves great attention most especially for those of us who are clear that we do not support: homophobia, white supremacy, real anti-Semitism, immigrant-bashing, islamophobia, and all the other crap that goes along with these sorts of Far Right forces...

I agree that great attention should be paid. Still, just because X believes "this," and Y believes "that," doesn't persuade me either way.

(I suppose David Duke may eat Corn Flakes for breakfast, too — but I that's not why I don't eat Corn Flakes. I don't eat them because it's shitty cereal.)

Oh very much agreed- still, can we even envision a movement without all the "white supremacy, real anti-Semitism, immigrant-bashing, islamophobia, and all the other crap that goes along with that Far Right".

If so, how could we go about creating such a movement?

That is my biggest concern!

My biggest political concern right now is an AngloAmericanIsraeli / Iranian War, which I think is
a less than stellar idea.

I think the conversation about creating that movement would be a very good thing to have and (like the enigmatic Rothschilds), deserves a thread of it's own. Such a movement might require completely new forms of organisation, which have yet to be invented.
For example, I think there are so many spectra of opinion involved (I would be happy to dialogue with David Icke, very unhappy about 'dialogue' with Aryan Nations) - but doing a 'calculus of involvement' is extremely difficult.

As far as pitting the goal of preventing "an AngloAmericanIsraeli / Iranian War" against the goal of having "a movement without all the "white supremacy, real anti-Semitism, immigrant-bashing, islamophobia, and all the other crap that goes along with that Far Right", I would suggest that this need not be posed as a binary choice.

In fact, I would daresay that having a movement which keeps the deluded and hateful in check would be way, way more likely to have a positive outcome in terms of building a broad, powerful and effective movement against the crimes of the Israeli State.

[Searcher08]

I think this is a really interesting point you have brought up, which is the concept of 'keeping in check' - which to me means an 'equilibrium' between the organisation and input from the environment. A balance, if you will.
I think this has been a huge unaddressed dilemma between on the one hand

A Keeping the integrity of the organisation intact (as in an alignment between its values and it's actions)
and
B Avoiding an unhealthy level of 'immune response' to 'difference' in the environment

The Centipede Factor is also crucial here - because I think part of what needs to happen is based on trust - keeping certain aspects as unconscious processes. It is much much easier to divide than unite and creating rules about interaction may be like the centipede creating rules about which leg goes after which - a process which ends up in system failure.

Small numbers of rules give rise to intelligent and complex behaviour
Large numbers of rules give rise to stupid and simple behaviour

[American Dream]

I think this is a really interesting point you have brought up, which is the concept of 'keeping in check' - which to me means an 'equilibrium' between the organisation and input from the environment. A balance, if you will.
I think this has been a huge unaddressed dilemma between on the one hand

A Keeping the integrity of the organisation intact (as in an alignment between its values and it's actions)
and
B Avoiding an unhealthy level of 'immune response' to 'difference' in the environment

The Centipede Factor is also crucial here - because I think part of what needs to happen is based on trust - keeping certain aspects as unconscious processes. It is much much easier to divide than unite and creating rules about interaction may be like the centipede creating rules about which leg goes after which - a process which ends up in system failure.

Small numbers of rules give rise to intelligent and complex behaviour
Large numbers of rules give rise to stupid and simple behaviour

So granted that there's always going to be a gray area where principled people may parse things differently, can we agree- at least- that inclusion of people who are clearly affiliated with say, neo-nazi, racist skinhead, or "christian patriot" movements would not be good for groups organizing in support of Palestinian Liberation?

[Searcher08]

That is an interesting point, because so much hangs on what 'inclusion' means and what 'affiliation' represents.
If for example there was a massive rally against the Iran war (like the > 1 million demo in London in 2003) I would march with anyone. So the context there is in the sense of a sudden unexpected emergency, with a slim chance of effecting change - perhaps analogous to helping people in a burning building - politics would not be part of my that equation.
On the other hand, having a group of BNP supporters come along to join a Friends of Gaza group, I would tell them it would probably be better if they formed their own err... Fascists for Gaza Solidarity group, as I would have issues working with them.

[American Dream]

That is an interesting point, because so much hangs on what 'inclusion' means and what 'affiliation' represents.
If for example there was a massive rally against the Iran war (like the > 1 million demo in London in 2003) I would march with anyone. So the context there is in the sense of a sudden unexpected emergency, with a slim chance of effecting change - perhaps analogous to helping people in a burning building - politics would not be part of my that equation.
On the other hand, having a group of BNP supporters come along to join a Friends of Gaza group, I would tell them it would probably be better if they formed their own err... Fascists for Gaza Solidarity group, as I would have issues working with them.

If you were in a march opposing Israeli war crimes, do you really think it would be helpful to have a contingent of uniformed fascists marching behind a banner that said "Nazis Against Zionism"?

Because if you do, then I think we need to have a discussion about strategy...

[Searcher08]

That is an interesting point, because so much hangs on what 'inclusion' means and what 'affiliation' represents.
If for example there was a massive rally against the Iran war (like the > 1 million demo in London in 2003) I would march with anyone. So the context there is in the sense of a sudden unexpected emergency, with a slim chance of effecting change - perhaps analogous to helping people in a burning building - politics would not be part of my that equation.
On the other hand, having a group of BNP supporters come along to join a Friends of Gaza group, I would tell them it would probably be better if they formed their own err... Fascists for Gaza Solidarity group, as I would have issues working with them.

If you were in a march opposing Israeli war crimes, do you really think it would be helpful to have a contingent of uniformed fascists marching behind a banner that said "Nazis Against Zionism"?

Because if you do, then I think we need to have a discussion about strategy...

Actually, I think 'Nazis Against Zionism' is a GREAT idea. I would think the only way it could be improved would be by having ZOMBIE NAZIS.

[American Dream]

[
Actually, I think 'Nazis Against Zionism' is a GREAT idea. I would think the only way it could be improved would be by having ZOMBIE NAZIS.

Well, hopefully you do understand why I might consider it strategically questionable- and hopefully you do agree.

The next question- assuming that we do agree about this- concerns what do we do about it...

[Searcher08]

Wiki provides a nice definition of strategy

A strategy is a long term plan of action designed to achieve a particular goal.

One of my issues with the left is that (very broadly speaking) - there is often little agreement about what particular goals are sought - in a positive sense. There is much more often a re-action
a saying that "We DO NOT want X, Y, Z".

Elements of a strategy
'long term' - when I was worked at err... HAL CORP, they had a road map 25years into the future.

'plan' - a good plan is a living document that is adaptive, but also keeps its eye on the target. It is actually USED - like a good map.

'..of action' - this is critical - it isnt a plan of concepts or ideas - it is at the level of specific do-able actions like write article, draw artwork, post flyer, Tweet 3 times a day etc

'designed to achieve...' - this means that the plan needs to be thought through from the point of view of ALL potential stakeholders, preferably WITH their input. To give an example, you might find Union A are to your surprise very disinterested in your campaign, but Union B are totally behind it. This needs to be known BEFORE starting out.
It also means that the plan needs to consider different scenarios, so that flexibility can be built in beforehand

a particular goal - this means a goal that has been selected from a range of options - not in the vague direction of "Motherhood and Apple Pie" bromides which are so vague that everyone agrees with them and forgets them... there is a whole piece here on HOW do we get that goal - and here is the rub - powerful goals comes naturally from a powerful vision, but there is currently widely held POWERFUL VISION.

Zeitgeist:Moving Forward Got to the section 'The Beginning' at 2:31:08
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=4Z9WVZddH9w

I am beginning to think that only something of this magnitude e.g.a Resource-based system or a localisation / Solari approach will engage people.




Maybe there is an Occupy Strategy Consulting... niche for me

[American Dream]

It seems to me that for Justice to prevail in historic Palestine, there needs to be a broad global movement in opposition to the policies of the Israeli State- especially in the United States, which is so very important in the equation.

It further seems to me that the Nazis and others of that ilk are poison to that movement.

Do you disagree with this, Searcher?

[slimmouse]

It seems to me that for Justice to prevail in historic Palestine, there needs to be a broad global movement in opposition to the policies of the Israeli State- especially in the United States, which is so very important in the equation.

It further seems to me that the Nazis and others of that ilk are poison to that movement.

Do you disagree with this, Searcher?

And there it is folks

Peace is ever unatainable , courtesy of the AD model, where there are simply too many poisoners of the well to make even the most important changes possible.

Fuck you AD.

I mean seriously, take youre never ending diatribe about this that and the other elsewhere.

Youre full of it, end of.

[American Dream]

It seems to me that for Justice to prevail in historic Palestine, there needs to be a broad global movement in opposition to the policies of the Israeli State- especially in the United States, which is so very important in the equation.

It further seems to me that the Nazis and others of that ilk are poison to that movement.

Do you disagree with this, Searcher?

And there it is folks

Peace is ever unatainable , courtesy of the AD model, where there are simply too many poisoners of the well to make even the most important changes possible.

Fuck you AD

So you think it makes good strategic sense to welcome open Nazis and the like into Palestine Solidarity work?

Where did you learn that this makes sense?

[barracuda]

Fuck you

Don't do that, please.

[slimmouse]

It seems to me that for Justice to prevail in historic Palestine, there needs to be a broad global movement in opposition to the policies of the Israeli State- especially in the United States, which is so very important in the equation.

It further seems to me that the Nazis and others of that ilk are poison to that movement.

Do you disagree with this, Searcher?

And there it is folks

Peace is ever unatainable , courtesy of the AD model, where there are simply too many poisoners of the well to make even the most important changes possible.

Fuck you AD

So you think it makes good strategic sense to welcome open Nazis and the like into Palestine Solidarity work?

Where did you learn that this makes sense?

It seems to me that for Justice to prevail in historic Palestine, there needs to be a broad global movement in opposition to the policies of the Israeli State- especially in the United States, which is so very important in the equation.

It further seems to me that the Nazis and others of that ilk are poison to that movement.

Do you disagree with this, Searcher?

And there it is folks

Peace is ever unatainable , courtesy of the AD model, where there are simply too many poisoners of the well to make even the most important changes possible.

Fuck you AD

So you think it makes good strategic sense to welcome open Nazis and the like into Palestine Solidarity work?

Where did you learn that this makes sense?

Fuk you AD. Ive seen you from a thousand miles away you LOSER.

Exactly what problem do you have with people taking the first steps to liberty by abolishing FRL .

Answer; "well thats what the nazis want"

How about a free palestinian state ?

Answer; "well those aligned with the said liberty are nazis "


Fuk you.

[Searcher08]

It seems to me that for Justice to prevail in historic Palestine, there needs to be a broad global movement in opposition to the policies of the Israeli State- especially in the United States, which is so very important in the equation.

It further seems to me that the Nazis and others of that ilk are poison to that movement.

Do you disagree with this, Searcher?

I think as I mentioned before that for justice to prevail in Palestine, an Iranian War needs to be avoided - because if it kicks off, Bibi et al will use the daily rain of rockets from Hezbollah as an excuse to enact the biggest ethnic cleansing since Bosnia.

You didnt address or discuss any of the points I raised regarding strategy - and seem to illustrate my point - for example who gets to make the call about whether someone is a neo-Nazi? There are loads of Daily Kos and HuffPo drones that see Ron Paul as one.

To re-phrase the discussion in terms of a 'poison' metaphor is no doubt vivid and meaningful to you but it isn't one which I use - as for me it misses some of the complexities of the situation - a poison frame is only one viewpoint and as a model it leaves unanswered the issues I raised above. Also you are seeking to define a structure when there isn't an agreed 'To Be' end state in mind in other words, until we agree on the vision, all other conversations are stymied.

To seek clarity in a situation of conflict we need to broaden the perspective until we gain alignment and agreement and work from there - we don't have a Zeitgeist-like articulation about what 'success' would look like in the Middle East.

[slimmouse]

Fuck you

Don't do that, please.

OK mods. But how about looking at the bs posted as an excuse for reason ?