Silicon Investor (SI) -- The First Internet Community

STOCKTALK

We've detected that you're using an ad content blocking browser plug-in or feature. Ads provide a critical source of revenue to the continued operation of Silicon Investor. We ask that you disable ad blocking while on Silicon Investor in the best interests of our community. If you are not using an ad blocker but are still receiving this message, make sure your browser's tracking protection is set to the 'standard' level.

Politics : Foreign Affairs Discussion Group -- Ignore unavailable to you. Want to Upgrade?

To: JohnM who wrote (98658)	5/20/2003 1:54:11 PM
From: carranza2	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

As an expert in recognizing generalities, perhaps you recognized this one: Finally, Lewis manages the most despicable calumny of all: the equation of the Arab world with the Nazi movement. He begins his extended discussion of this topic thus: “The Nazi version of German ideologies was influential in nationalist circles, notably among the founders and followers of the Ba’th Party in Syria and Iraq.” With this characterization in hand, what better reason could there be for the United States to invade this “axis of evil?” Straight from Beeman's pen. Let's deconstruct this bit of folderol. Lewis equates "the Arab world" with Nazism. Hmm....I don't think the text supports the argument. Lewis' actual text: “The Nazi version of German ideologies was influential in nationalist circles, notably among the founders and followers of the Ba’th Party in Syria and Iraq.” Historically, Lewis is 100% correct. How in Heaven's name can one go from the documented Nazi influence on the Ba'ath parties in the 1950s to equating the entire Arab world with Nazism to a justification for the "axis of evil" for the benefit of neocons without even a short rest stop to catch one's intellectual breath is beyond me. I don't know the Lewis' texts which are the basis for Beeman's claims. And see no need to find them. Ignorance is such bliss, isn't it, especially when writing extended diatribes on writings you won't even bother to read. C'mon, John, you can do better than that.

To: JohnM who wrote (98658)	5/20/2003 9:09:16 PM
From: Nadine Carroll	Read Replies (1) \| Respond to of 281500

The first is the charge that because some of the Arab leadership tried to work affinities with the Nazis, that therefore one can say Arab "ideology" whatever that is, is so similar to the Nazis that it can be called such. No, John, the charge is, to quote Lewis directly: “The Nazi version of German ideologies was influential in nationalist circles, notably among the founders and followers of the Ba’th Party in Syria and Iraq.” Now, is it really a controversial statement to say that Ba'athism, in its Syrian and Iraqi forms, has a fascist philosophy that favors a centralized police state? Really, I would have thought that the only reasonable argument to make against this statement was that under Saddam's rule, Iraq used the Stalinist system as a model more that the Nazi system. During the life the Third Reich, the Arab nationists movements in Iraq, Palestine and Egypt were openly emulating the Nazis and allying themselves with the Nazis. Nothing covert about it. Swastikas and all. That influence did not die out with the Third Reich; though it generally switched alliegance to the USSR. So how is it an "overgeneralization", much less a "calumny" as Beeman claims, to say, quote, “The Nazi version of German ideologies was influential in nationalist circles, notably among the founders and followers of the Ba’th Party in Syria and Iraq.” It was influential as all get-out. Second, this post of yours reminds me of the talk of an Arab mentality, culture, mindset, whatever, advanced here without any attempt to make careful arguments pulling all the evidence together to substantiate it John, John, you speak as if I had never posted numerous articles from the Arab media, the Israeli media, anthropologists and historians illustrating my points. Let me put it this way - do you have any evidence suggesting that my points are not correct? If so, let's see it. Otherwise, I am by now unimpressed with this claim for a higher standard of evidence, proper academic credentials, etc, since it is your standard line when you have no good reply to an argument. Clearly criticism of the actions, statements, whatever of the Sharon government is not, on its face, anti-semitic. Clearly, also, criticism of the Israeli state for not moving out of the West Bank after 67 is not, on its face, anti-semitic. Clearly not, and you know perfectly well that I have always distinguished true criticism of Israeli policy from anti-Semitism, so this is a cheap shot. I was thinking more of certainly lines that can be heard every Friday in the major mosques of the Arab world (you want quotes, I'll find them). Lines like "the Jews are the sons of apes and pigs", and "kill the Jews wherever you meet them".