Leading dissenting, anti-Zionist historian Norman Finkelstein is, according to Edward Alexander, professor emeritus of English at the University of Washington, “the most admired Jew in the whole history of antisemitism.”
Even for a Zionist propagandist like Alexander, that’s a big call. Does he not realise that such meaningless hyperbole renders his positions irrelevant? Furthermore, he seems to believe that Jews have no right to criticise Israel. If they do, they are, ipso facto, anti-Semites. How long must be suffer this desperation?
It seems that current events are driving these Zionist nutters to futher desperation. More and more fo them seem to be getting in touch with their inner David Horowitz these days.
With teh refusla of mos of the world to join the US and Israel in tring to isolate Hamas, alogn with the victory of Hamas, and no doubt the outting of AIPAC as a rogue element inthe US, Zionists are digging in.
Thansk to people like Alexander, the charge of anti-Semitism is being blunted and made to lose it;s significance. These people are clearly more happy cutting their nose to spite their face than using their brain.
Oh this is rich!!!:
http://www.haaretz.com/hasen/spages/687915.html
It is indeed rich. People across the Arab world treat the US with appropriate contempt and their behaviour towards Hamas has only reinforced the bankruptcy of their position.
Since Norman seems to be the posterboy of every neo-nazi and holocaust denial website in existance, it seems that Alexander, who appears to have better credentials than Norman, has hit nail squarely on the head.
Finkelstein’s mentor on Finkelstein
“As concerns particular assertions made by Finkelstein…, the appropriate response is not (exhilarating) “debate” but (tedious) examination of his footnotes. Such an examination reveals that many of those assertions are pure invention… No facts alleged by Finkelstein should be assumed to be really facts, no quotation in his book should be assumed to be accurate, without taking the time to carefully compare his claims with the sources he cites…. I had not thought that (apart from the disreputable fringe) there were Germans who would take seriously this twenty-first century updating of the ‘Protocols of the Elders of Zion.’ I was mistaken.”
Peter Novick,
whose work Finkelstein described as the “initial stimulus” for The Holocaust Industry (p. 4),
‘Offene Fenster und Tueren,’
Sueddeutsche Zeitung, February 7, 2001
I guess as a leftie, I have to thank my lucky stars that I’m not also jewish. I mean, if say, Pele (the greatest footballer who ever lived) were jewish and maybe had said something like “you know, the jews really f@cked the Palistinians”, pretty soon we’d be questioning his actual existence.
Yeah OK he did play for Brazil like on three world cup finals, which they won, but was he any good?
Did he ever deserve to be selected?
I’m not sure who you’re talking about - Pele? did he play basketball for the New York Knicks? No, he was an anti-semite from Brazil.
So Chris,
At least Novik makes the first reasoned argument against Filkenstain, where Alexander and his ilk resort hyperbole and meanignelss and unsubstatiated diatribe we’ve come to expect from the Hotowitz school of debate. Few have even taken Filkenstaint to task for his arguments, preferring to imply that those who consider what Filkenstien has to say must be part of an anti-Semtic movement. Very lame andentirely predictable.
Novik’s critique does nto stipulate which assertinos by Filkenstein are questionable. What did Filenstein mean when he refreed to Peter Novick, when decribign him as the “initial stimulus” for The Holocaust Industry? Was he payign hmage to Novik or was he criticising Novik for being party ot the olocaust industry, of which Filkenstein is such an ardent critic?
Of course, it goes without saying that Filkenstein competely dissected Allan Derschowitz’a work, and did the same in a face to face debate with him, so if Filkestein’s assertions are questionable, what does that say about poor Deschowitz?
You would have to ask Novik what he means, I was merely supplying the quote. It does not appear that Finkelstein did anything that affected the quality or respect given Dershwitz’s work. That Finkelstein was forced by his publisher to remove the blatant lies does say something about quality of Finkelstein’s work and the lack of respect in academic circles.
Alexander, an eminant scholar, was not merely slinging mud. I believe he was fairly accurate with “his chief acolyte Norman Finkelstein is a best-selling author in Germany even though his books are deemed worse than worthless by nearly all scholars, including German ones.”
Filkenstein’s critique of Derchowitz has completely discredited him. That’s why Derchowitz went to such extremes to prevent Filkensteins book being released last year, applealing even to the Governator to put an halt on the release of Beyond Chutzpah.
Finkelstein was forced to remove a very few stetments, which in the context of a whole critiue aimed at Derchowitz, is harldy a failure on his part so much as an indictement of Dershowitz given how much he mobilized to have Finkelstein’s book prevented from being published.
Who is it that deems Finkelstein’s wokr worhtless other than his opponents? Utterly meanlingless statement that one Chris.
You must have read some review that was not very factual. Dershowitz remains very credited no matter how much Norman rants and raves.
Dershowitz’s demolision of Norman forced the publisher to hold up publication until Norman removed the outright lies.
I am surprised that nearly all scholars are Norman’s opponents, but clearly he has earned their opposition. Seems much more meaningful now.
Dershowitz is synonimous with incoherent punditry thourhout North America. OIn his debate with Filkenstain he came out oooking like a complete amature. Filkenstin was asked to remove a few senetences. Teh majority of the work was published in full.
Avi Shlaim of Oxford University calls Beyond Chutzpah “Brilliantly illuminating… On display are all the sterling qualities for which Finkelstein has become famous: erudition, originality, spark, meticulous attention to detail, intellectual integrity, courage, and formidable forensic skills.”
Chutzpah has been consingend to the dustbins of fraud and plagiarism.
Chutzpah of course being the works of Dershowitz.
Can you please show any review that states that Dershowitz’s punditry is incoherent? Or that North Americans believe that to be true?
Again, please post any objective reviews showing Dershowitz acted as an amatuer?
From one of the many essays on the subject:
Dershowitz is impatient with that line of defense. “One of the most offensive things they are saying in their defense is that they have the support of Jews. Our staff is Jewish, the people who endorsed the book are Jewish, some of our best friends are Jewish. Well, Norman Finkelstein proves that a Jew can be an anti-Semite,” he says. In the end, Dershowitz has little doubt about why the press published Beyond Chutzpah. “I think they have a double standard for judging the hard anti-Zionist right than they would for David Duke and the far right. But David Duke and Norman Finkelstein are the same,” he says. “Except that Duke is slightly brighter.”