Comments on: Weinberg’s Claim of Moral High Ground Rings Hollow in Face of Bigoted Remark http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2007/06/weinbergs-claim-of-moral-high-ground-rings-hollow-in-face-of-bigoted-remark/ a radical newsletter in the struggle for peace and social justice Thu, 20 Nov 2008 14:10:25 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.1 By: matt http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2007/06/weinbergs-claim-of-moral-high-ground-rings-hollow-in-face-of-bigoted-remark/#comment-1775 matt Sat, 23 Jun 2007 06:11:34 +0000 http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2007/06/weinbergs-claim-of-moral-high-ground-rings-hollow-in-face-of-bigoted-remark/#comment-1775 as far as i know Einstein was almost a zionist, so it's not unlikely he would support Weinberg. Too bad the author didn't feel like speaking at the right time (why? lack of courage?). -Primitive- doesn't sound like a compliment, still he doesn't know himself exactly what W. meant, he didn't even ask, he woke up today, at least he did though. Nobel prize, especially for technical areas, is note assigned on moral grounds(it's so pathetic to see people still don't get that), although, as far as i indirectly know, Weinberg is a beautiful person. At the end, by not very successfully criticizing something unclear Weinberg said the author misses the very point of the situation, is that boycott something wrong or not? I think it's wrong, one simple reason being science is supposed to go beyond nations, scientists know it. What does a weird Israeli mathematician working on a weird problem have to do with Olmert 's decisions? That would not change if also US and UK were under a boycott(no mention of a boycott proposal for PA or Hamas though, should they just be funded to keep killing in Israel and among themselves?) The thing gets ridiculous if you notice that the more pro-Palestinian part of the Jewish population is probably employed in the academia. as far as i know Einstein was almost a zionist, so it’s not unlikely he would support Weinberg.
Too bad the author didn’t feel like speaking at the right time (why? lack of courage?). -Primitive- doesn’t sound like a compliment, still he doesn’t know himself exactly what W. meant, he didn’t even ask, he woke up today, at least he did though.
Nobel prize, especially for technical areas, is note assigned on moral grounds(it’s so pathetic to see people still don’t get that), although, as far as i indirectly know, Weinberg is a beautiful person.
At the end, by not very successfully criticizing something unclear Weinberg said the author misses the very point of the situation, is that boycott something wrong or not? I think it’s wrong, one simple reason being science is supposed to go beyond nations, scientists know it.
What does a weird Israeli mathematician working on a weird problem have to do with Olmert ’s decisions?
That would not change if also US and UK were under a boycott(no mention of a boycott proposal for PA or Hamas though, should they just be funded to keep killing in Israel and among themselves?)
The thing gets ridiculous if you notice that the more pro-Palestinian part of the Jewish population is probably employed in the academia.

]]> By: sk http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2007/06/weinbergs-claim-of-moral-high-ground-rings-hollow-in-face-of-bigoted-remark/#comment-1007 sk Sat, 02 Jun 2007 23:01:28 +0000 http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2007/06/weinbergs-claim-of-moral-high-ground-rings-hollow-in-face-of-bigoted-remark/#comment-1007 There is a long history of European secular critique of religion in which Judaism served as Christianity's stand-in because of dominance of the latter. George Mosse (http://mosseprogram.wisc.edu/index.html) covered well the politics of this kind of "enlightened" onslaught. He also discussed response of Western European Jewry against this brand of vituperation--ad-hoc tactics ranging from self-hating assimilationism to messianic religious nationalism. It looks like Islam is serving the same kind of proxy role for the so-called "rational humanists" of our age like Sam Harris and Steven Weinberg. btw, I went to the University of Texas as well and remember Weinberg had a reputation for being impatient and arrogant, qualities amply displayed in Jensen's account. For anyone who doesn't want to be bamboozled by the glamor of the Nobel Prize and it's laureates, this (http://tinyurl.com/324rge) book is an excellent antidote. There is a long history of European secular critique of religion in which Judaism served as Christianity’s stand-in because of dominance of the latter. George Mosse (http://mosseprogram.wisc.edu/index.html) covered well the politics of this kind of “enlightened” onslaught. He also discussed response of Western European Jewry against this brand of vituperation–ad-hoc tactics ranging from self-hating assimilationism to messianic religious nationalism. It looks like Islam is serving the same kind of proxy role for the so-called “rational humanists” of our age like Sam Harris and Steven Weinberg.

btw, I went to the University of Texas as well and remember Weinberg had a reputation for being impatient and arrogant, qualities amply displayed in Jensen’s account. For anyone who doesn’t want to be bamboozled by the glamor of the Nobel Prize and it’s laureates, this (http://tinyurl.com/324rge) book is an excellent antidote.

]]> By: Kim Petersen http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2007/06/weinbergs-claim-of-moral-high-ground-rings-hollow-in-face-of-bigoted-remark/#comment-977 Kim Petersen Sat, 02 Jun 2007 02:07:11 +0000 http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2007/06/weinbergs-claim-of-moral-high-ground-rings-hollow-in-face-of-bigoted-remark/#comment-977 Jensen is usually so right on many matters, but I find his reasoning for not supporting a boycott of Israel superficial and dead wrong. Jensen’s logic that a boycott must target all criminal entities runs cover for major criminal entities. The same reasoning could be applied to almost any instance where there is, or has been, a boycott. Following this reasoning, the apartheid South African regime would never have been targeted perhaps extending the duration of apartheid. Walmart would never be boycotted for anti-unionism or its general exploitation of labor because so many other businesses would have to be targeted. Coke could go on stealing a community's water in India and assassinating union leaders in Columbia because so many soft drink corporations would have to be targeted for their crimes. One key non-violent plank from activists’ arsenal would be removed. What then is the solution? It is doubtful that people are capable of large-scale boycotting. What is wrong about targeting the criminal entities at the apex and working down the ladder of criminal entities? Since a boycott is credited with helping bring down the apartheid regime in South Africa that would seem to argue in favor of selective boycotts. If it defeated apartheid in South Africa, then why not Israel? Taking down one criminal offender is better than taking down none, yes? British academics seem to agree. And why should academics be deciding what is the best action on behalf of Palestinians? Palestinians are the victims, so ask them. Jensen is usually so right on many matters, but I find his reasoning for not supporting a boycott of Israel superficial and dead wrong. Jensen’s logic that a boycott must target all criminal entities runs cover for major criminal entities. The same reasoning could be applied to almost any instance where there is, or has been, a boycott. Following this reasoning, the apartheid South African regime would never have been targeted perhaps extending the duration of apartheid. Walmart would never be boycotted for anti-unionism or its general exploitation of labor because so many other businesses would have to be targeted. Coke could go on stealing a community’s water in India and assassinating union leaders in Columbia because so many soft drink corporations would have to be targeted for their crimes. One key non-violent plank from activists’ arsenal would be removed.
What then is the solution?
It is doubtful that people are capable of large-scale boycotting. What is wrong about targeting the criminal entities at the apex and working down the ladder of criminal entities? Since a boycott is credited with helping bring down the apartheid regime in South Africa that would seem to argue in favor of selective boycotts. If it defeated apartheid in South Africa, then why not Israel? Taking down one criminal offender is better than taking down none, yes?
British academics seem to agree.
And why should academics be deciding what is the best action on behalf of Palestinians? Palestinians are the victims, so ask them.

]]> By: Al Giddens http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2007/06/weinbergs-claim-of-moral-high-ground-rings-hollow-in-face-of-bigoted-remark/#comment-968 Al Giddens Fri, 01 Jun 2007 20:30:15 +0000 http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2007/06/weinbergs-claim-of-moral-high-ground-rings-hollow-in-face-of-bigoted-remark/#comment-968 Israel is a racist state funded by my hard earned tax dollars . I am for stoping aid to Israel and only then will there be peace there .With no aid money Israel will be forced to make peace its that simple But I worry that its too late after 60 years of a policy like this the people have become to EXTREAM to do any good . Israel is a racist state funded by my hard earned tax dollars . I am for stoping aid to Israel and only then will there be peace there .With no aid money Israel will be forced to make peace its that simple But I worry that its too late after 60 years of a policy like this the people have become to EXTREAM to do any good .

]]> By: Max Shields http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2007/06/weinbergs-claim-of-moral-high-ground-rings-hollow-in-face-of-bigoted-remark/#comment-955 Max Shields Fri, 01 Jun 2007 16:18:43 +0000 http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2007/06/weinbergs-claim-of-moral-high-ground-rings-hollow-in-face-of-bigoted-remark/#comment-955 Much of this appears to be a kind of racism - conflating Arabs with Islamophobic inclinations. I say "kind of" because like you, I don't know what's in people's hearts but it seems that racism (I know you were kinder by using "bigot") is a means by which to dehumanize, and that is clearly the case when calling a people primitive. I've noted, and Robert I say this because you mentioned a series on faith and reason, a movement of "non-believers" which has turned into an indictment against Isam on the one hand, but on the other, on atheism, itself. Of note is the recent "debate" between Chris Hedges and Sam Harris. The latter has used "reason" as cover for justifying (with some ducking and hiding) Western dominance in various parts of the world - Middle East is one example. And his exploitation of fundamentalists actions - 9/11 - to sanctify torture has been used to conflate his ideology with the legacy of non-believers (such as Bertrand Russell who no doubt would be rolling in his grave at the thought). And all of this in the superior posturing of one claiming human reason above all else. We can throw Christopher Hitchens in for good measure - he comes by his Islamophobia by way of a contorted polity and polemic ranting. Much of this appears to be a kind of racism - conflating Arabs with Islamophobic inclinations.

I say “kind of” because like you, I don’t know what’s in people’s hearts but it seems that racism (I know you were kinder by using “bigot”) is a means by which to dehumanize, and that is clearly the case when calling a people primitive.

I’ve noted, and Robert I say this because you mentioned a series on faith and reason, a movement of “non-believers” which has turned into an indictment against Isam on the one hand, but on the other, on atheism, itself. Of note is the recent “debate” between Chris Hedges and Sam Harris. The latter has used “reason” as cover for justifying (with some ducking and hiding) Western dominance in various parts of the world - Middle East is one example. And his exploitation of fundamentalists actions - 9/11 - to sanctify torture has been used to conflate his ideology with the legacy of non-believers (such as Bertrand Russell who no doubt would be rolling in his grave at the thought). And all of this in the superior posturing of one claiming human reason above all else. We can throw Christopher Hitchens in for good measure - he comes by his Islamophobia by way of a contorted polity and polemic ranting.

]]> By: gerald spezio http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2007/06/weinbergs-claim-of-moral-high-ground-rings-hollow-in-face-of-bigoted-remark/#comment-948 gerald spezio Fri, 01 Jun 2007 14:12:46 +0000 http://www.dissidentvoice.org/2007/06/weinbergs-claim-of-moral-high-ground-rings-hollow-in-face-of-bigoted-remark/#comment-948 As usual, you cut right to the heart. Weinberg's claims of anti-Semitism concerning the boycott are especially troubling to scientists who respect Weinberg. More standard Israeli peeyar , and absolutely devoid of scientific objectivity. What would Feynman's position be? Or Einstein's? Weinberg's clearly stated Israel first bigotry shows how pervasive Israel's murderous influence has been in the Israeli engineered slaughter of the untermenschen. As usual, you cut right to the heart. Weinberg’s claims of anti-Semitism concerning the boycott are especially troubling to scientists who respect Weinberg. More standard Israeli peeyar , and absolutely devoid of scientific objectivity.

What would Feynman’s position be? Or Einstein’s? Weinberg’s clearly stated Israel first bigotry shows how pervasive Israel’s murderous influence has been in the Israeli engineered slaughter of the untermenschen.

]]>