We remember

shopping

Haroon Siddiqui wrote a fine Anti-amnesia column in the Star. His topic was the unsung heroes of the anti-apartheid struggle.

Apartheid did not go gently into the night. It was pushed and shoved by thousands of anonymous “small people….church activists who organized on moral grounds against the evil of the system. Siddiqui names several from the different faith traditions–Bonnie Green, Moira Hutchinson, Jim Webb sj and the great Anglican bishop Ted Scott. Academics  played a huge part John Saul at York, Joanna Naiman at Ryerson who is still ferocious in her resistance to the present apartheid state Israel. In 1982 Many of us took our money out of the Bank of Commerce when we found an alternative : the TD Bank was breaking with South Africa.

At cocktail parties when asked if we wanted some wine, we asked, “What kind?”

“Does it matter?

“Yes, I don’t like blood with my wine.” We boycotted South African wines.

Many of today’s Catholic bishops now  in their 60s were nowhere to be seen. What had the gospel to do with apartheid? These men now head major sees.

And oh those Tories like Tony Clement.

Many remember his role as president of the young Tories at the U of T.. Clement and pals decided that the Law School should invite Glenn Babb, the South African Ambassador, to defend apartheid. As for the ANC—they were terrorists. My friend Lennox Farrell a fellow teacher was so incensed he ended up tossing a gavel at the smooth Babb. Clement oozed his way up the Tory pole and now sits as a cabinet minister, part of the demolition team undercutting the common good.

images-1

All those other Tories—Flaherty, Harris, Baird—too busy building their careers to get engaged in such an issue.

And remember Conrad Black support the ANC rival Buthelezi?

Some people don’t forget.

Capitalism however acts as a scrubbing machine erasing our memories ever intent on the latest diversion.

Some people (like Siddiqui and nobody at the Sun) however do remember who stood tall in those years.And we remember that Mandela consistently supported the Palestinian struggle.

Thanks to columnists like Siddiqui we remember, just like we remember Mandela’s great friendship with the Palestinians.

Maybe that is why Netanyahu never showed at Mandela’s funeral. Why pay tribute to that Palestinian lover?

maybe now the world can move on to apartheid Israel.

The aforementioned professor emerita Joann Naiman phrased it well

Israel is not identical to South Africa. But that does not mean it is not an apartheid state. In fact, there are over 50 Israeli laws that discriminate against Palestinians … There are different rights and privileges for different categories of people that determine how and where they can live and work, with whom they can associate, where they can travel, whether they can live with their spouse, and so on. Permits for Palestinians to travel beyond their assigned areas are stringently controlled.”

Israel reta 
Advertisements

3 Comments »

  1. 1

    Ted, My good friend Jim Kirkwood, was the UCC staff person on the “Africa Desk”. I remember that Jim was also on Siddiqui’s list. Jim was an essential part of the UCC role on the struggle. Peace, Allan

    Sent from my iPad

    >

  2. 2

    …there are over 50 Israeli laws that discriminate against Palestinians … There are different rights and privileges for different categories of people that determine how and where they can live and work, with whom they can associate, where they can travel, whether they can live with their spouse, and so on. Permits for Palestinians to travel beyond their assigned areas are stringently controlled.”

    For example? If there are over 50 Israeli laws that discriminate against Palestinians, would it have been too much to ask to list some of them? Moreover, why are permits from Palestinians to travel beyond their assigned areas stringently controlled? Let’s ask “Why?”

  3. 3

    Every year at about this time, radical Islamic students–aided by radical anti-Israel professors–hold an event they call “Israel Apartheid Week.” During this week, they try to persuade students on campuses around the world to demonize Israel as an apartheid regime. Most students seem to ignore the rantings of these extremists, but some naïve students seem to take them seriously. Some pro-Israel and Jewish students claim that they are intimidated when they try to respond to these untruths. As one who strongly opposes any censorship, my solution is to fight bad speech with good speech, lies with truth and educational malpractice with real education.

    Accordingly, I support a “Middle East Apartheid Education Week” to be held at universities throughout the world. It would be based on the universally accepted human rights principle of “the worst first.” In other words, the worst forms of apartheid being practiced by Middle East nations and entities would be studied and exposed first. Then the apartheid practices of other countries would be studied in order of their seriousness and impact on vulnerable minorities.

    Under this principle, the first country studied would be Saudi Arabia. That tyrannical kingdom practices gender apartheid to an extreme, relegating women to an extremely low status. Indeed, a prominent Saudi Imam recently issued a fatwa declaring that anyone who advocates women working alongside men or otherwise compromises with absolute gender apartheid is subject to execution. The Saudis also practice apartheid based on sexual orientation, executing and imprisoning gay and lesbian Saudis. Finally, Saudi Arabia openly practices religious apartheid. It has special roads for “Muslims only.” It discriminates against Christians, refusing them the right to practice their religion openly. And needless to say, it doesn’t allow Jews the right to live in Saudi Arabia, to own property or even (with limited exceptions) to enter the country. Now that’s apartheid with a vengeance.

    The second entity on any apartheid list would be Hamas, which is the de facto government of the Gaza Strip. Hamas too discriminates openly against women, gays, Christians. It permits no dissent, no free speech, and no freedom of religion.

    Every single Middle East country practices these forms of apartheid to one degree or another. Consider the most “liberal” and pro-American nation in the area, namely Jordan. The Kingdom of Jordan, which the King himself admits is not a democracy, has a law on its books forbidding Jews from becoming citizens or owning land. Despite the efforts of its progressive Queen, women are still de facto subordinate in virtually all aspects of Jordanian life.

    Iran, of course, practices no discrimination against gays, because its President has assured us that there are no gays in Iran. In Pakistan, Sikhs have been executed for refusing to convert to Islam, and throughout the Middle East, honor killings of women are practiced, often with a wink and a nod from the religious and secular authorities.

    Every Muslim country in the Middle East has a single, established religion, namely Islam, and makes no pretense of affording religious equality to members of other faiths. That is a brief review of some, but certainly not all, apartheid practices in the Middle East.

    Now let’s turn to Israel. The secular Jewish state of Israel recognizes fully the rights of Christians and Muslims and prohibits any discrimination based on religion (except against Conservative and Reform Jews, but that’s another story!) Muslim and Christian citizens of Israel (of which there are more than a million) have the right to vote and have elected members of the Knesset, some of whom even oppose Israel’s right to exist. There is an Arab member of the Supreme Court, an Arab member of the Cabinet and numerous Israeli Arabs in important positions in businesses, universities and the cultural life of the nation. A couple of years ago I attended a concert at the Jerusalem YMCA at which Daniel Barrenboim conducted a mixed orchestra of Israeli and Palestinian musicians. There was a mixed audience of Israelis and Palestinians, and the man sitting next to me was an Israeli Arab, who is the culture minister of the State of Israel. Can anyone imagine that kind of concert having taking place in apartheid South Africa, or in apartheid Saudi Arabia?

    There is complete freedom of dissent in Israel and it is practiced vigorously by Muslims, Christians and Jews alike. And Israel is a vibrant democracy.

    What is true of Israel proper, including Israeli Arab areas, is not true of the occupied territories. Israel ended its occupation of the Gaza several years ago, only to be attacked by Hamas rockets. Israel maintains its occupation of the West Bank only because the Palestinians walked away from a generous offer of statehood on 97% of the West Bank, with its capital in Jerusalem and with a $35 billion compensation package for refugees. Had it accepted that offer by President Bill Clinton and Prime Minister Ehud Barak, there would be a Palestinian state in the West Bank. There would be no separation barrier. There would be no roads restricted to Israeli citizens (Jews, Arabs and Christians.) And there would be no civilian settlements. I have long opposed civilian settlements in the West Bank, as many, perhaps most Israelis, do. But to call an occupation, which continues because of the refusal of the Palestinians to accept the two-state solution, “Apartheid” is to misuse that word. As those of us who fought in the actual struggle of apartheid well understand, there is no comparison between what happened in South Africa and what is now taking place on the West Bank. As Congressman John Conyors, who helped found the congressional Black caucus, well put it:

    “[Applying the word “Apartheid” to Israel] does not serve the cause of peace, and the use of it against the Jewish people in particular, who have been victims of the worst kind of discrimination, discrimination resulting in death, is offensive and wrong.”

    The current “Israel Apartheid Week” on universities around the world, by focusing only on the imperfections of the Middle East’s sole democracy, is carefully designed to cover up far more serious problems of real apartheid in Arab and Muslim nations. The question is why do so many students identify with regimes that denigrate women, gays, non-Muslims, dissenters, environmentalists and human rights advocates, while demonizing a democratic regime that grants equal rights to women (the chief justice and speaker of the Parliament of Israel are women), gays (there are openly gay generals in the Israeli Army), non-Jews (Muslims and Christians serve in high positions in Israel) and dissenters, (virtually all Israelis dissent about something). Israel has the best environmental record in the Middle East, it exports more life saving medical technology than any country in the region and it has sacrificed more for peace than any country in the Middle East. Yet on many college campuses democratic, egalitarian Israel is a pariah, while sexist, homophobic, anti-Semitic, terrorist Hamas is a champion. There is something very wrong with this picture.

    By Alan Dershowitz

    Why is it that the bright light of the truth of these words is lost on someone like Ted? He doesn’t hear them. He refuses to make adjustments to his presentation of Israel. He continues his simplistic narrative. He absolutely refuses to point out the horribly unjust state of affairs in the surrounding Middle Eastern countries, the homophobia, the denigration of women, the discrimination and persecution of non Muslims, etc. Why? Why is he so bold and brave in the face of Israel, but silent in the face of Muslim injustice and apartheid? This is a fascinating problem. It is purely psychological. I guess Israel is a very safe target, which says a great deal about Israel. But that’s why people like Ted have zero credibility. They are ideologues of the highest order. It is an ideology they defend, a constructed narrative. The truth of the matter is far more complex, not so black and white, full of ambiguity, where both sides have made great mistakes, etc. The truth cannot be nicely slotted into an ideological construct, without shaving off so many details and facts in the process. But it is easier to make the facts fit the theory. There’s greater emotional complacency. “I now have it all figured out, and it is clear and simple”. But of course, it is anything but. This man Ted has an ego that is so huge that it will simply not permit him to see how deficient is his treatment of these complex issues. A lazy mind and a huge ego are dangerous things. He has a need to sound like an expert. Terribly sad.


RSS Feed for this entry

Leave a Reply

Please log in using one of these methods to post your comment:

WordPress.com Logo

You are commenting using your WordPress.com account. Log Out / Change )

Twitter picture

You are commenting using your Twitter account. Log Out / Change )

Facebook photo

You are commenting using your Facebook account. Log Out / Change )

Google+ photo

You are commenting using your Google+ account. Log Out / Change )

Connecting to %s

%d bloggers like this: