Israel/Palestine
Related: About this forumWhat do 'pro-Israel' image-mongers actually stand for?
So thats what this is all about? The conversation over Israel has levitated from policy itself (like the occupation, stupid) to the meta-argument over whether Israels image is fairly or unfairly portrayed, to the meta-meta (uber-meta? meta squared?) conversation of whether the pro-Israel camp (a flawed euphemism for pro-occupation) is fairly or unfairly portrayed by the liberal camp, and whether those liberals are fairly or unfairly being called anti-Israel, anti-Semitic, Iran-loving and by association, nuclear-destruction-second-Holocaust-of-Israel extra-terrestrials (all but the final moniker is a paraphrase of Blocks quote in the article but trust me, its there by implication).
Although I work on campaigns for a living, in which images and communications are integral to the effort to connect elites with the public, the question of imaging Israel has gone far, far too far.
I dare each camp to say what it really stands for regarding Israel, and while were at it, for the Palestinians too since Israel does in fact control them. Specifically, I dare the other side to stop trying to distract the conversation, along with millions and millions of dollars, by mumbling about meta-meta. Ill start! Heres what I stand for: ending the occupation, preserving and salvaging Israels democracy, equality and human rights in every society where I can have an influence. That means mainly in Israel, but since I view Israelis and Palestinians as intertwined under any circumstances, I feel somewhat responsible for both.
I dare the pro-Israel camp to say what it stands for. Members of that camp have created a wildly polarized, self-important discourse (after meeting one recently, he tweeted his surprise to find that I was not a bat-shit crazy leftie); so I would have to guess that they are diametrically opposed to everything I believe. That makes the pro-Israel camp pro-occupation, anti-democracy, anti-equality, for a pre-emptive strike on Iran even if it happens unilaterally and the Middle East becomes Armageddon. Go on guys, say what you really think: I dare you. And if you cant, then spend those dollars on some starving people.
http://972mag.com/what-do-pro-israel-image-mongers-actually-stand-for/68549/
azurnoir
(45,850 posts)Left and right are not the only labels being used extraneously in the paper. Last spring, around Israel Independence Day, Elie Wiesel published an ad in three major American newspapers stating: For me, the Jew that I am, Jerusalem is above politics. Haaretz then published a story about American reactions to the ad, taking the liberty to call it the pro-Israel Jerusalem ad. (Barak Ravid. U.S. Officials Slam Pro-Israel Jerusalem Ad. Haaretz. April 21, 2010).
What prompted Haaretz to classify the ad as pro-Israel? At first glance it seems that the paper is weighing in on the matter by equating the insistence that Jerusalem is beyond political discourse with a pro-Israel stance. However, anyone familiar with Haaretzs journalistic style who has also read the ad must conclude that the papers insertion of the adjective pro-Israel could only mean one of two things: Either it was an error committed by the copyeditor when formulating the headline, or, more likely, Haaretz intended to communicate that since Wiesels ad expresses unmistakable support for the Israeli government line (which currently is, in fact, that Jerusalem is not up for discussion), it therefore qualifies as pro-Israel.
However, the ad did not convey that Jerusalems future should be determined unequivocally by Israels government, but that Jerusalem is beyond the bounds of political negotiation altogether. Wiesel is not interested in Jerusalems status as a segregated, conflict-ridden city administered by the State of Israel, but rather with his own personal conception of historical and primordial entitlement to the city as a Jew (not an Israeli). The newspapers choice to label this as pro-Israel is therefore misinformed at best and biased at worst. But more importantly, it shows how the use of such dichotomous labels in the news can obscure, rather than elucidate, a story.
After all, the term pro-Israel has become a highly contested concept, specifically among American Jews, as exemplified most plainly by the fact that there are now three rival Israel lobbies in the US AIPAC, J Street and the Emergency Committee for Israel that all identify as pro-Israel.
http://972mag.com/who-is-right-wing-and-what-is-pro-israel/5359/