I shall never stop envying people educated and gainfully employed in one of the modern vaguely defined “sciences”. Like the case of learned Dr Lentin here:
Dr Ronit Lentin was born in Haifa prior to the establishment of the State of Israel and has lived in Ireland since 1969. She is a political sociologist and a writer of fiction and non-fiction books and is the director of the MPhil in Ethnic and Racial Studies, Department of Sociology and coordinator of the Global Networks project, Institute for International Integration Studies (IIIS), Trinity College, Dublin. Ronit has published extensively on racism in Ireland, Israel and Palestine, gender and genocide, and gender and the Holocaust.
Political sociologist in Ethnic and Racial Studies – this must be a golden mine for anyone strong in scientifically-sounding terminology only a few selected peers could understand and share. Still, some of it spills to the media sometimes and then we have pearls like this:
Launching her latest book on Thinking Palestine on Wednesday evening, she said Israel was a racial regime but was not based upon colour nor ethnicity.
Now try to figure it out: a racial (sic!) regime that is not based upon color nor ethnicity. No worries, here is the answer:
It was based on military force, security and intelligence, the author told an audience of academics and journalists at London University’s School of Oriental and African Studies (SOAS).
I think I can translate it for the laymen in a simple Leninist format:
Military force + security + intelligence = racial regime.
If you don’t get it, you must be taken to the Sociology dept. of Trinity College for re-education.
Anyhow, thanks deity for journalists, otherwise it would have been much more difficult. Still, even in this, relatively simple wording, these two quotes may cause you some mental turmoil. Let’s get to a simple and straightforward part:
Lentin defended the actions taken by the Palestinian people in their struggle to regain their homeland, saying that resistance is legal and even suicide bombings against Israeli military targets could be justified.
Cool. Now everything is clear. Another AssaJew. Move on, nothing more to see here.
Cross-posted on SimplyJews.
Snoopy, you are showing your out of date vocabulary. “Racist” used to have something to do with race. Now it simply means “something I don’t like.” Note that Israel is frequently called racist although about half the population is more or less physically indistinguishable from the surrounding populations.
“Racist” is now like “fascist.” I mean, whatever George Bush is–and I’m not a big fan–he’s hardly fascist,if by “fascist” you mean something with some connection to the political ideas of Mussolini or Hitler or Franco, say.
Both words are now merely signifiers that the speaker doesn’t approve of something or someone. In that sense, then, Lentin’s remarks are perfectly in order.
She’s obviously a chucklehead but she’s speaking Newspeak accurately.
While you are right in general, Alex, notice that she said “racial” and not “racist”. This is a troubling turn of speech that is not covered by Geneva convention ;-)
I know Dr Lentin. Although I disagree completely with her politically, I’m afraid you’re caricaturing her argument here. When she talks about the ‘racial state’ she’s talking about the kind of ethnic nationalisms that still prevail in Europe (I know the report you cite says otherwise, but I think it’s a little garbled). The difference she sees in Israel is that the racial state has to be enforced through force and repression (in this I see little difference, actually – just because Europe’s repressions are mostly in the past doesn’t mean the states of Europe are not repressive racial states), which she opposes. The biggest flaw in her position is that she fails to reckon with the much more divisive and abusive racial politics on the Arab side of the equation.
To her credit, Lentin has avoided getting involved with the more disgusting elements of the anti-Israel movement in Ireland. She has also paid a steep personal price for her politics in that she is largely excluded from Jewish communal life in Dublin.
Jon,
Thank you for your comments. I wouldn’t argue against your opinion that the report I based this post on is flawed. For two reasons at least: first is that you know the lady in question and second is that the source I used is, frankly, stinking.
Still – as you mentioned, I was rather caricaturing the person and not trying to seriously analyze her writings. Besides, the quote re suicide bombers is rather difficult to distort, even if the source is stinky.
Best,
STG