Anthony Loewenstein’s ‘ethnic slur’ against NZ’s Prime Minister
Anthony Loewenstein in his blog has referred to New Zealand’s Prime Minister as “Jewish” in a clear ethnic slur in commenting about Key’s support of Hosni Mubarak and a ‘conservative’ policy by the Kiwis on Egypt. Given that that Keys, whose mother was Jewish, is an agnostic and an occasional church goer, Loewenstein is way out of line.
Unless one thinks that there is a biological cause and effect relation between Key’s ancestry and his foreign policy it it is an irrelevant, facetious and insulting remark, particularly since as far as I know, there is no relationship between Key’s mother’s religion and NZ’s foreign policy. It is true that Key is acknowleged by the NZ Jewish community and Israeli press as a friend of Israel, but Loewenstein has engaged in the same tactic as the extreme right when they talk about Key– that being a Jew is prima facie evidence of a particular ‘loyalty’. Never mind that Malcolm Fraser’s mother also had a Jewish background.
One does not have to be critical of Israel to play with antisemitic tropes. Even some of my Palestinian contacts are not at all impressed by Lowenstein’s latest. I’ve defended Loewenstein’s right to be critical of Israel in the past, but I’m not falling for this game of his.
Loewenstein has made a habit of using inflammatory language to appeal to his international audience It’s his right to do so, but he should get his facts right and apologize to John Key.
Larry Stillman
Elwood, Vic.
John Key is Jewish. Even Israeli politicians said so when he was elected Prime Minister. What’s the problem?
There are also extremists amongst the Jewish community that become” jews of convenience” when it suits them…!
Take a good hard look at the community and see for your -selves.
To Paul Winter. No, I am not trying to hide anti-semitism. I have engaged in any number of vituperative debates with ‘left anti-semites’, including sadly, some Jews, so you are wrong there. I have pointed out Loewenstein’s games on a number of occasions. But not all people on the left in favour of the ‘destruction of Israel’. That is far too crude.
To Shirl. It is not just a matter of bagging people that they should ‘move in with Palestinian mates’ because of controversial political opinions. I am concerned with ethnic sterotyping and vilification in political debate on the left and right. I don’t like it.
David Heilpern–you clearly don’t know my politics. I suggest you look at my many pieces on Galus Australis or the Australian Jewish Democratic Society websites to see my highly critical position on Israel–where I have advocated a selective boycott, used the word apartheid, spoken for a truly secular and democratic state of Israel and a State of Palestine got stuck into Zionist propaganda and ‘birthright’ tours which ‘cut through the crap’. Not to speak of I don’t know how many letters in the Jewish press over the years, and non-stop Facebooking on what is going on in Egypt). I don’t know how you an claim that I am intellectually barren.
It’s fair to say that my political opinions on Israel and related matters, put me in the minority. But I don’t name call or chuck around the term Jew or Zionist as an insult .
You obviously haven’t read me.
Loewenstein’s comments, in context, were perfectly sound, and Stillman invites ridicule by suggesting otherwise. The fact is that a sizable proportion of those with Jewish heritage, and almost all on the right of politics with Jewish heritage are pro current US/Israel policy. To draw attention to the fact that Keys has lurched to the right on Israel and is of Jewish heritage allows the reader to draw their own conclusions. Loewenstein’s blog is essential reading for those of Jewish heritage who are tired of the one-eyed Zionist crap that passes for middle east analysis in the Jewish media. For me and my Jewish friends it is the centerpiece of conversation when the topic of Israel is raised. Stillman cannot help but concentrate on the petty, because he is intellectually barren in dealing with the substantive. Like why Israel and the US has supported such a corrupt regime in Egypt for so long. And what are they going to do now? Find another puppet?
Stillman stops short of stating that Loewenstein is an antisemite. And as far as I am concerned when any person states that when a person’s Jewish background stops him from doing what is right in a situation, that is antisemitism, pure and simple. It is ignorant bigotry, because it claims that there isonly one way to act and that is the one that Loewenstein approves of. When Stillman faults Loewenstein for engaging in the same tactics as the extreme right he is trying to hide that the extreme left to whick Loewenstein belongs is just as antisemitic. That Stillman’s contacts are not impressed does not matter; they just don’t want one of their supporters openly saying what they think and jeopardising the image they are trying to build to blind us to their agenda: the destruction of the Jewish State.
Anthony Loewenstein must have had an unhappy and lonely childhood, to crave so much attention. Maybe he had a bad time with antisemitism that it left him feeling that way himself?
His arrogance and rudeness is appalling. On looking through his blog just now, , I couldn’t help but notice the distain he exhibits for Australia and I wonder why he is here at all.
Maybe he should consider moving in with his “Palestinian” mates.??
A few weeks ago, he made a personal attack on Rosana Tyler, the Liberal candidate for the seat of Marrickville,.
“Australian Jewish candidate shows true Zionist colours.”
“The Jews. Ah, Zionist Jews.
. Here’s a hint for the Zionists in our community. Please say this far more often and more publicly; the general community needs to hear your views about Arabs and how much Israel has deformed our religion over and over again:”
She did nothing and what he quoted was a twisted version of her words.
…………………and I agree, “he should get his facts right and apologise” to Rosana Tyler