February 7, 2010
To the Editor:
In your article on Professor Tony Judt, a stubborn mistruth was repeated ("The Trials of Tony Judt," The Chronicle Review, January 15).
In October 2006, Judt was scheduled to speak at an event hosted by Network 20/20, which rented space from the Polish Consulate in New York. His topic dealt with the Middle East.
Shortly before the event took place, the consulate withdrew its offer. Consul General Krzysztof Kasprzyk, who only learned about the scheduled event at the last minute, stated that his building was not a "catering hall," and that it would not provide a venue to those who opposed the basic tenets of Polish foreign policy. In calling for a one-state solution, Judt advocated Israel's end, which runs contrary to Poland's support for Israel's right to exist.
The article perpetuates the urban legend that the cancellation resulted from pressure exerted by the American Jewish Committee and another Jewish group. The only action taken by AJC was one friendly phone call to inform the Consul General, in case he did not know, that the event was slated to take place, so he would be prepared for any criticism resulting from those who might misconstrue the rental of the space as endorsement of the speaker's message. There was no request to cancel the event.
But the story took on a life of its own, with Judt presenting himself as a target of Jewish agencies trying to silence or intimidate Israel's critics. He quickly found a group of supporters reflexively prepared to believe the worst about pro-Israel organizations. More than three years later, this apocryphal account continues to surface.
While we are totally at odds with advocates of a one-state solution and other virulent critics of Israel, we have never challenged their First Amendment rights. In other words, it is long overdue to put the 2006 canard to rest.
David Harris
Executive Director
American Jewish Committee
New York
--
A Sense of Peoplehood is not a Pathology
It is not racist for a professor such as Alan Dershowitz or for a professor like Kevin MacDonald to advocate for their ethnic group interests.
The words for bigotry, that are often used, such as: ant-Semitic, anti-white, anti-black, anti-Arab, anti-feminist, anti-gay and hundreds of other labels, are for the most part overstated. Instead, it should be seen as pro-white, or pro-Jewish or pro-women or pro-traditional family and not be ashamed of it.
These "pro" sensibilities are part of the human condition, not to be pathologized into an "anti."
It is about group interests.
A race or an ethnie without a sense of peoplehood or ethnichood will end up being used to achieve the goals of other ethnies. (Yes, ethnie, not ethnic).
No comments:
Post a Comment