NetNews Usenet Archive 1992 #27/NN_1992_27.iso/spool/soc/culture/jewish/20075

Text File | 1992-11-15 | 3.9 KB | 85 lines

Newsgroups: soc.culture.jewish
Path: sparky!uunet!gatech!asuvax!ennews!enuxhb.eas.asu.edu!makowsky
From: [e-mail] (David Makowsky)
Subject: Re: Why I think Kach's policies are racist (AND DANGEROUS)
Message-ID: <[e-mail]>
Summary: SURPRISE!
Sender: [e-mail] (USENET News System)
Reply-To: [e-mail] (David Makowsky)
Organization: Arizona State University, Tempe AZ
References: <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]> <[e-mail]>
Date: Sun, 15 Nov 1992 18:31:48 GMT
Lines: 71

In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Joel Goldberg) writes:

# In article <[e-mail]> [e-mail] (Joel Goldberg) writes:

#   I just want to add one more thing to my little manifesto. The reason
#   people don't feel that they need to read R. Meir Kahane's writings in
#   minute detail to dismiss him as a racist
#   is that any other time they've come across someone else who
#   claims to have a simple, one stroke solution to a complex problem
#   that person has invariably been a racist. Moreover, if they have
#   achieved power they have brought retardation, if not outright
#   destruction, onto the heads of their societies. This is true for
#   everyone's favourite example of evil incarnate all the way down to
#   such local heros as Alberta's Bible Bill Aberhart and his $25 social
#   credit idea.

    At last, a reasonable argument.

#   The ledger is overwhelmingly weighted on the side of simple solutions
#   proposed by racists, and their failure. The broad public is aware,
#   on a cultural level, that this is true and this is why they tend to


    See, it was not so hard to come up with something that is
relevent.

#   reject out of hand anyone new who proposes similar easy answers.
#   Now David Makowsky will answer "Even if this is true (and I'm not
#   agreeing that it is) Kach deserves to be judged on its merits."
#   This of course brings us full circle. He won't spell out how Kach
#   differs from Xism (see my previous posting) and he won't address
#   why the usual constellation of forces that have destroyed all other
#   "simple solutions" won't come into play with respect to Israel.

    Actually, you seem to be making the point I was trying to make at
the beginning of this thread.  People have been claiming essentially
that Kach is racist because it is racist.  They have not spelled out
why this was so, although they did manage to make a number of ad
hominem irelevent arguments in a straw man approach to "prove" their
case.

#   The
#   unstated answer, as always, is that God will protect Israel.
    I have not been claiming that.  Are you reading what I write, or
are you making things up?

#   This
#   in turn brings me to my point that Jews are not commanded by God
#   to be Xist, (whatever else we may be commanded _to_ be) and thus
#   saying that God will protect Israel is to do the unJewish thing of
#   commanding God to perform miracles (ie. to thwart the aforementioned
#   usual constellation of forces--the natural order of things).

    I have not stated that either.

#   I don't want to accuse D. Makowsky of something before the fact, but
#   if you do respond with "you're wrong" and nothing else, I won't
#   feel that my argument has been materially weakened.

    I have not just been saying "'you're wrong' and nothing else".  I
have been claiming that the line of argumentation being used was
irrelevent and I have showed why.

    Here I will do that however.  And it does not bother me that you
do not feel your argument has been weakened.  It has not.  Even though
I disagree with it.
--
    There are three types of people in the world.  Those that are good
at math and those that are not.

[e-mail]