Annual Fundraising Appeal
Over the course of 21 years, we’ve published many unflattering stories about Henry Kissinger. We’ve recounted his involvement in the Chilean coup and the illegal bombings of Cambodia and Laos; his hidden role in the Kent State massacre and the genocide in East Timor; his noxious influence peddling in DC and craven work for dictators and repressive regimes around the world. We’ve questioned his ethics, his morals and his intelligence. We’ve called for him to be arrested and tried for war crimes. But nothing we’ve ever published pissed off HK quite like this sequence of photos taken at a conference in Brazil, which appeared in one of the early print editions of CounterPunch.
100716HenryKissingerNosePicking
The publication of those photos, and the story that went with them, 20 years ago earned CounterPunch a global audience in the pre-web days and helped make our reputation as a fearless journal willing to take the fight to the forces of darkness without flinching. Now our future is entirely in your hands. Please donate.

Day11

Yes, these are dire political times. Many who optimistically hoped for real change have spent nearly five years under the cold downpour of political reality. Here at CounterPunch we’ve always aimed to tell it like it is, without illusions or despair. That’s why so many of you have found a refuge at CounterPunch and made us your homepage. You tell us that you love CounterPunch because the quality of the writing you find here in the original articles we offer every day and because we never flinch under fire. We appreciate the support and are prepared for the fierce battles to come.

Unlike other outfits, we don’t hit you up for money every month … or even every quarter. We ask only once a year. But when we ask, we mean it.

CounterPunch’s website is supported almost entirely by subscribers to the print edition of our magazine. We aren’t on the receiving end of six-figure grants from big foundations. George Soros doesn’t have us on retainer. We don’t sell tickets on cruise liners. We don’t clog our site with deceptive corporate ads.

The continued existence of CounterPunch depends solely on the support and dedication of our readers. We know there are a lot of you. We get thousands of emails from you every day. Our website receives millions of hits and nearly 100,000 readers each day. And we don’t charge you a dime.

Please, use our brand new secure shopping cart to make a tax-deductible donation to CounterPunch today or purchase a subscription our monthly magazine and a gift sub for someone or one of our explosive  books, including the ground-breaking Killing Trayvons. Show a little affection for subversion: consider an automated monthly donation. (We accept checks, credit cards, PayPal and cold-hard cash….)
cp-store

or use
pp1

To contribute by phone you can call Becky or Deva toll free at: 1-800-840-3683

Thank you for your support,

Jeffrey, Joshua, Becky, Deva, and Nathaniel

CounterPunch
 PO Box 228, Petrolia, CA 95558

Is It Possible to "Understand" the Rise in "Anti-Semitism"?

Is It Possible to Understand the Rise in Anti-Semitism?

by Ben White

Recently there have been a number of articles written on the subject of anti-Semitism. Some of them have sought to distinguish between criticism of the state of Israel and genuine anti-Semitism. A greater number have warned of an apparent alarming rise in attacks on Judaism in Europe so serious that it is reminiscent of the 1930s.

In any debate there is usually a conflict in definition, and this is particularly important when dealing with something as sensitive as racism or religious hatred. An article in the Guardian on Monday 17th June provides an intriguing insight into the confusion surrounding the current discussions on anti-Semitism.

The article in question concerns a rise in Israelis seeking to obtain German citizenship, through a clause in the constitution over Holocaust compensation, for insurance, "should the conflict with the Palestinians worsen."

As background to the situation, the report cites the controversy in Germany over alleged anti-Semitic remarks made by Jürgen Möllemann, the deputy leader of the FDP party, when he compared the Israeli government’s actions to those of the Nazi regime. Since his remarks Jewish groups have taken to the streets to call for Mr Möllemann’s resignation.

Comparisons between the Israeli government and the Nazis is unwise and unsound, since the Israelis have not (at the time of going to press) exterminated in a systematic fashion an enormous percentage of the Palestinians. Cold-blooded killings, beatings, house demolitions, vandalism, occupation, military assaults, and two historical pushes at ethnic cleansing–yes. Full fledged genocide–no.

However, the comparison is not anti-Semitic. It does not make racist assumptions, nor does it smack of bigotism. Whether you agree with him or not, Mr Möllemann’s comments cannot, on their own, be called anti-Semitic.

The Guardian article concludes with the most attention-grabbing section of the piece. It cites a poll undertaken by the Sigmund Freud Institute in Frankfurt, in which thirty-six per cent of participants said they would agree with the statement "I can understand very well that some people are unpleasant towards Jews." This was taken to indicate an increase in anti-Semitism, since it was a dramatic increase from 20% three years ago.

I was somewhat startled by this, since I do not consider myself an anti-Semite, yet I can also understand why some are. There are, in fact, a number of reasons. One is the state of Israel, its ideology of racial supremacy and its subsequent crimes committed against the Palestinians. It is because Zionists have always sought to equate their colonial project with Judaism that some misguidedly respond to what they see on their televisions with attacks on Jews or Jewish property.

Secondly, and related to the first point, is the widespread bias and subservience to the Israeli cause in the Western media. Once again, due to the (theologically false) mergence of Zionism with Judaism, unconditional support for the state of Israel in the media can lead some to misguidedly respond with charges of a ‘Jewish conspiracy’. Thirdly, European culture has a history of anti-Semitism (as it has also been guilty of racism to other peoples) that has been, and probably still is, embedded in collective consciousness. Its roots can be traced, at least to some extent, to the shameful teachings of many in the Church.

Of course, the common denominator in all forms of racism is the disturbed emotional profile of the protagonist. I do not pretend to be a psychologist, but I imagine factors could be ignorance, a dominant influential personality in their life, low self-esteem and numerous other religious, socio-economic dynamics.

I have just provided a by no means comprehensive list of reasons why "I can understand very well that some people are unpleasant towards Jews." I do not agree with them, but I can understand.

To interpret agreement with this statement as an indication of anti-Semitism is wrong and intellectually flawed. It can only contribute to real anti-Semitism by the creation of hysteria and polarisation that real racists thrive on, whether they are in a slum in Marseille, a dinner party in Berlin, or the Knesset.

Ben White can be reached at: benwhite1983@yahoo.com

Is It Possible to "Understand" the Rise in "Anti-Semitism"?

Is It Possible to Understand the Rise in Anti-Semitism?

by Ben White

Recently there have been a number of articles written on the subject of anti-Semitism. Some of them have sought to distinguish between criticism of the state of Israel and genuine anti-Semitism. A greater number have warned of an apparent alarming rise in attacks on Judaism in Europe so serious that it is reminiscent of the 1930s.

In any debate there is usually a conflict in definition, and this is particularly important when dealing with something as sensitive as racism or religious hatred. An article in the Guardian on Monday 17th June provides an intriguing insight into the confusion surrounding the current discussions on anti-Semitism.

The article in question concerns a rise in Israelis seeking to obtain German citizenship, through a clause in the constitution over Holocaust compensation, for insurance, "should the conflict with the Palestinians worsen."

As background to the situation, the report cites the controversy in Germany over alleged anti-Semitic remarks made by Jürgen Möllemann, the deputy leader of the FDP party, when he compared the Israeli government’s actions to those of the Nazi regime. Since his remarks Jewish groups have taken to the streets to call for Mr Möllemann’s resignation.

Comparisons between the Israeli government and the Nazis is unwise and unsound, since the Israelis have not (at the time of going to press) exterminated in a systematic fashion an enormous percentage of the Palestinians. Cold-blooded killings, beatings, house demolitions, vandalism, occupation, military assaults, and two historical pushes at ethnic cleansing–yes. Full fledged genocide–no.

However, the comparison is not anti-Semitic. It does not make racist assumptions, nor does it smack of bigotism. Whether you agree with him or not, Mr Möllemann’s comments cannot, on their own, be called anti-Semitic.

The Guardian article concludes with the most attention-grabbing section of the piece. It cites a poll undertaken by the Sigmund Freud Institute in Frankfurt, in which thirty-six per cent of participants said they would agree with the statement "I can understand very well that some people are unpleasant towards Jews." This was taken to indicate an increase in anti-Semitism, since it was a dramatic increase from 20% three years ago.

I was somewhat startled by this, since I do not consider myself an anti-Semite, yet I can also understand why some are. There are, in fact, a number of reasons. One is the state of Israel, its ideology of racial supremacy and its subsequent crimes committed against the Palestinians. It is because Zionists have always sought to equate their colonial project with Judaism that some misguidedly respond to what they see on their televisions with attacks on Jews or Jewish property.

Secondly, and related to the first point, is the widespread bias and subservience to the Israeli cause in the Western media. Once again, due to the (theologically false) mergence of Zionism with Judaism, unconditional support for the state of Israel in the media can lead some to misguidedly respond with charges of a ‘Jewish conspiracy’. Thirdly, European culture has a history of anti-Semitism (as it has also been guilty of racism to other peoples) that has been, and probably still is, embedded in collective consciousness. Its roots can be traced, at least to some extent, to the shameful teachings of many in the Church.

Of course, the common denominator in all forms of racism is the disturbed emotional profile of the protagonist. I do not pretend to be a psychologist, but I imagine factors could be ignorance, a dominant influential personality in their life, low self-esteem and numerous other religious, socio-economic dynamics.

I have just provided a by no means comprehensive list of reasons why "I can understand very well that some people are unpleasant towards Jews." I do not agree with them, but I can understand.

To interpret agreement with this statement as an indication of anti-Semitism is wrong and intellectually flawed. It can only contribute to real anti-Semitism by the creation of hysteria and polarisation that real racists thrive on, whether they are in a slum in Marseille, a dinner party in Berlin, or the Knesset.

Ben White can be reached at: benwhite1983@yahoo.com