April 29 - The General Meeting Flood

 Friends-

The Members for Palestine (M4P) orchestrated an outrageous subversion of the April 29 General Meeting, casting aside not only the scheduled agenda, but also the governing bylaws and longstanding tradition.

There's a lot to unpack. Here is the quick review.

For those of you just tuning in, following the October 7 massacre and kidnapping of Israelis by Hamas and other terrorist groups coming out of Gaza,  M4P organized an effort to have the Park Slope Food Coop endorse the destruction of Israel by joining the BDS Movement (the boycott of Israel).

Here is a brief overview of the Coop's governance process:

1. A member submits a proposal to the Agenda Committee
2. The Agenda Committee schedules the proposal for a General Meeting (GM) where it will be discussed by the members present and voted on.
3. Following the conclusions of the member portion of the GM, the Board of Directors convenes and votes on the proposal according to the outcome of the members' votes.

Due to the toxic nature of BDS, the Coop has been unable to secure a venue to host a meeting to consider the BDS proposal. During Covid, the Coop held meetings on Zoom. In response, M4P has been advocating for "hybrid meetings," combining in-person and online attendance, to overcome the challenge of securing a location.

The hybrid meeting proposal was scheduled for a GM at a large venue to accommodate the anticipated higher turnout. The venue abruptly cancelled the reservation without explanation. The Agenda was changed and the meeting relocated to a smaller venue.

M4P was furious about the cancellation. They issued an aggressive email to their subscribers, urging them to flood the GM, and demand a vote on hybrid meetings. And flood they did. The venue capacity was exceeded and dozens of members were unable to enter.

Every GM starts with an "Open Forum" for members to briefly state concerns or ask questions. In a well coordinated action, several members stated they wanted hybrid meetings because they will be so much more "democratic" and not having them is "voter suppression." Then a few more members suggested that during the Board of Directors meeting, the hybrid meeting proposal should be considered and voted on. Finally, through a series of procedural maneuvers under Robert's Rules of Order, a member who identified himself as "John,"  overturned the chair and adjourned the meeting,  canceling the scheduled agenda.

The Board of Directors convened. In an unprecedented move, one of the directors made a proposal to  issue a referendum on holding hybrid meetings. The motion passed 3-2.

All this is in contravention to the Park Slope Food Coop by-laws and General Meeting Procedures.

It is unclear what will happen next.

There you have it. Mob rule. In the so-called name of "democracy," the bylaws and long-standing traditions were tossed aside. The elephant in the room quietly tiptoed home, smiling.

BDS Fragility

Our adorable Hamas groupies, the PSFC Members 4 Palestine (M4P) held a Zoom BDS teach-in earlier tonight. A few of us signed up to attend. We were all denied access.

This illustrates how insecure they are. Don’t they believe in the righteousness of their cause that they could convince anyone to join them? 

Either they know they are lying or they don’t feel confident to be able to answer when challenged. What were they so afraid of if we attended? Perhaps they understand that our challenges might expose how shallow and hate-filled they are.

Civil Rights and the Park Slope Food Coop

 

From the Park Slope Food Coop’s mission statement:

"We are committed to diversity and equality, opposing discrimination in any form. We strive to make the Coop welcoming and accessible to all while respecting the opinions, needs, and concerns of every member."

Stating this commitment is one thing; defining and applying it fairly is another. The Coop's Membership Manual includes an Anti-Discrimination Policy "prohibiting any form of discrimination or harassment among members." The Coop will not tolerate discrimination against the classes listed in the NYC Human Rights law. 

In 1964, the landmark Civil Rights Act became law. Title VII prohibits employment discrimination. Title VI prohibits discrimination in programs and activities receiving federal financial assistance. The Department of Education Office of Civil Rights (OCR) is tasked with assuring Title VI compliance at educational institutions receiving federal funds.

Although the Park Slope Food Coop membership is not bound by Titles VI and VII of the 1964 Civil Rights Act, these guidelines provide valuable standards for members’ behavior toward one another. The protections of Title VII, which apply to the paid staff, should also govern interactions between staff and members and among the members themselves.

The Coop is a communal membership organization.  In addition to its role as a grocery store, many members have viewed it as a venue for political advocacy, much like an educational institution. In this context, Coop management can and should voluntarily adopt the principles of Title VI, which protect students, to determine acceptable member activities. In other words, Coop activities should align with the expectations of the OCR, not because of the risk of losing federal funding or lawsuit, but because it is the right thing to do.

In January 2023, the OCR issued a Fact Sheet  stating:

Title VI’s protection from race, color, or national origin discrimination extends to students who experience discrimination, including harassment, based on their actual or perceived: (i) shared ancestry or ethnic characteristics; or (ii) citizenship or residency in a country with a dominant religion or distinct religious identity.

In 1994, the OCR determined that educational institutions receiving federal aid have a responsibility to maintain a nondiscriminatory educational environment, even if the administration is not directly responsible for all instances of harassing conduct.

Anti-Zionism is Discrimination

Anti-Zionism constitutes a form of national-origin-based discrimination.  It seeks to delegitimize Israel as a sovereign nation and deny the national identity and heritage of its citizens.  It aims to vilify and discredit one nation and its citizens while promoting differential treatment of Israelis and Israeli-Americans.

Moreover, anti-Zionism is a form of discrimination and harassment rooted in targeting Jewish ethnicity.  At its core, it denies Jewish peoplehood and the historic connection of Jewish people to the Land of Israel, also known as Palestine.  Jews are told they are not real Jews, but frauds and imposters who claim a shared national heritage.

Ever since October 7, 2023, the Park Slope Food Coop administration - both the managerial paid staff and the elite committees - has allowed promotion of anti-Zionism within the Coop.  The group Members 4 Palestine (M4P) is actively advocating for the Coop to join and endorse BDS.  BDS is an anti-Zionist tactic to normalize the call for the elimination of Israel as the sovereign nation-state of the Jewish people.

There has been verbal harassment and threats made against members opposing BDS. Jewish and Israeli members are being subjected to the demonizing BDS lies that have incited multiple violent attacks on Jews and property in Brooklyn, North America and Europe. BDS propaganda is shared during open forum at the General Meetings and in the letters and members submissions of the Linewaiters Gazette.  The management is engaged in finding a venue to host a large membership meeting to consider endorsing the elimination of Israel.

For Jewish and Israeli members, the current environment at PSFC is profoundly troubling. We are compelled to spend our valuable free time countering falsehoods, defending our identities, and preparing to oppose this measure if it is ever brought to a vote. This situation is making membership increasingly untenable for us.

Anti-Zionism is Not Protected Speech

I believe the activities of M4P are being tolerated at the Coop due to two fundamental misunderstandings:

1. The Nature of the BDS Movement: The BDS Movement is often misrepresented as merely political advocacy for changes to Israel’s policies. In reality, BDS is deeply intertwined with anti-Zionism and explicitly aims for the elimination of Israel. Those who claim otherwise are either deliberately misleading or have failed to thoroughly research the movement’s objectives.
2. The Concept of Freedom of Speech: There seems to be a misconception regarding what "freedom of speech" entails. While the government is prohibited from limiting or penalizing speech, the Coop, as a private institution, has the authority to establish and enforce a code of conduct that regulates speech within its community. In fact, we already have such codes, as outlined in the Linewaiters' Gazette guidelines and our Membership Manual. Additionally, the Dispute Resolution Committee (DRC) and the Equity Access and Community Committee (EACC) are tasked with addressing breaches of this code.

What Can Be Done?

The DRC and EACC serve as the Coop’s official channels for addressing complaints. Both committees have the authority to recommend mediation between parties. Despite receiving and addressing numerous complaints from both anti-Zionists and our side regarding specific incidents, the DRC has declined to pursue further engagement or mandate mediation. When it comes to our broader complaint about the creation of a hostile environment, the DRC redirected us to the EACC.

Unfortunately, the EACC's leadership has demonstrated a clear and vocal anti-Zionist bias. The current head of the EACC was among the most prolific and outspoken anti-Zionist letter writers in the Linewaiters' Gazette during our previous encounters with BDS advocacy. Historically, the EACC has refused to consider complaints related to this issue, leaving us with no confidence in its ability or willingness to address the civil rights concerns of Jewish and Israeli Coop members.

The Coop's management—comprising the paid staff, Agenda Committee, Chair Committee, and Gazette Committee—bears responsibility for fostering the environment within the Coop. Unless they can present a compelling argument that anti-Zionism does NOT constitute harassment, there should be an immediate moratorium on the following: BDS-related speech at General Meetings and in the Gazette, the inclusion of BDS-related agenda items, and efforts to secure a larger meeting space for such discussions.

Dialog is the Answer

From the very beginning of M4P’s anti-Zionist activities at the Coop, Coop 4 Unity has consistently extended invitations to M4P to meet and discuss shared goals. These overtures have been met with silence; not one has been acknowledged.

I sincerely hope that dialogue between M4P and Coop 4 Unity can become a reality. I believe M4P sees itself as advocating for Palestinian rights and pursuing a just resolution to the conflict. It may be they are unaware of the broader implications of their support for BDS and its intrinsic connection to anti-Zionism. At best, they are deeply misinformed; at worst, they are knowingly propagating harmful disinformation. BDS does not advance the cause of Palestinian development or peace—it perpetuates the dominance of totalitarian, terrorist organizations and sustains cycles of violence.

Ultimately, I envision both groups working towards a joint statement that calls for the release of hostages, the disarmament and surrender of Hamas, a commitment to deradicalization, and a shared effort to foster coexistence. More than anything, I want the Coop to return to being the enjoyable and productive community it once was, where mutual respect and collaboration thrive.

I am indebted to the Mosaic Magazine essay How the Incoming Administration Can Restore Jewish Civil Rights by Tal Fortgang for the ideas in this post.

The underscores in the quoted material are mine.

What's an Anti-Zionist?

 

This December 3, 2024 interview of Times of Israel journalist Haviv Rettig Gur with Michael Moynihan of the The Free Press is worth watching in its entirety.

At around 48:00 minutes, Haviv address anti-Zionism. Slightly edited for clarity, he says: 

 What's an anti-Zionist?

An anti-Zionist is someone who thinks Israel should never have been founded.

That's a really interesting argument because every other Jew in the Eastern hemisphere is dead. What's the argument? Is the argument that the Jews who couldn't get into the West as the pressure was building in Eastern Europe and in Central Europe and in the Arab world because of immigration quotas and laws against them should have been able to get into the West? They should have had other choices other than to become Israeli. Is that the argument? I agree with that, if that's the argument. It would have been really nice if the whole world had opened their doors to these desperate refugees 10 seconds before their genocide, but it didn't.

Or is the argument that those Jews should just have died. They should just have died. Israel is the last living Jew in the Eastern hemisphere...

Jews were emptied out of everywhere. As the world homogenized few places did it as completely and perfectly as the Arab world. The Arab world is still in the process of brutally homogenizing. The Jews found one place, one Refuge, across three continents. The Jews had been living in Baghdad a thousand years before the Arab speakers got to Baghdad.   In 1930 there's a  census of where 25% of the city is Jewish in 1960 there's 0%. 0% of the city is Jewish.  It was twice as Jewish as New York and then 30 years later it's zero Jews. The Arab world empties out every Jew...

Is the argument that they should have died? 

Either your argument is history should have gone differently. In which case, I'm with you. It's a damn shame that Zionism turned out to be so prescient and correct. Or your argument is those Jews should have died and then I would be able to sleep better at night. Well then, you're a genocidal asshole. Or you're a Zionist.

PSFC Board of Directors Election

If you are a member of Park Slope Food Coop, you probably received an email on May 24 with voting instructions for the upcoming elections for 2 open positions on the Board of Directors.

Vote "YES" for Ramon Maislen and Sondra Shaievitz. They are the Coop 4 Unity candidates. They have most experience and years of membership than all the other candidates. They will protect our Coop.

Make sure to vote "NO" for Tess Brown-Lavoi and Keyian Vafai. They are the candidates from the group that wants to boycott Israel. We don't know what they would do if elected to the Board, and we don't want to find out!

Sign up for the Coop 4 Unity email list and/or WhatsApp group, 

12 Years Later - It's Deja Vu All Over Again

They're back. Or should I say there is a new crop of adorable children trying to get the Coop to endorse the BDS movement. The brutality of the October 7 attacks has roused their blood, and they feel emboldened to attack the Jews in Brooklyn. Perhaps not physically - yet. 

And so, we are organizing and fighting back. And we will succeed.

NYC City Council to Vote on anti-BDS Resolution

Resolution 1058-A, “A resolution condemning all efforts to delegitimize the State of Israel and the global movement to boycott, divest from, and sanction the people of Israel.” is scheduled for a vote on September 14 by the New York City Council.

I hope this will pass and I hope the members of the Council's Progressive Caucus will vote for it as well.  BDS falsely markets itself as a "progressive" cause.  Too many progressives are duped into supporting BDS because of confirmation bias and lack of knowledge about  a complex issue.

Let's be clear. Bigotry is not progressive.  Discrimination is not progressive. Defamation is not progressive.  Ignoring, denying or justifying violence is not progressive.  Denying history is not progressive. Distorting and selectively quoting international law is not progressive.

The BDS movement ignores the role of Arab anti-Jewish attitudes in the development of opposition to legal Jewish settlement in the Land of Israel during the pre-State and Ottoman periods.  The BDS movement denies the Jewish people their identity as a unique group with a national history and right to self-determination.  The BDS movement singles out the world's only Jewish for opprobrium.  The BDS movement falsely represents Israel.  The BDS movement ignores the existence, incitement and actions of Palestinian terror groups dedicated to targeting and murdering Jews - anywhere in the world.  The BDS movement's activities on American college campuses correlates with acts of violence, harassment and intimidation of Jewish students.

This is from the testimony of New York City Jewish Community Relations Council CEO Michael Miller to the Council last week.

BDS tactics are one-sided and are focused solely on eliminating Israel. BDS turns a blind eye to Palestinian actions which seek to undermine a two state solution, such as terrorism, indiscriminate rocket fire on civilian areas, repeated refusals to negotiate for peace, and unfortunate rejections of Israeli offers for Palestinian statehood. Rather than focusing on improving the situation for both peoples, BDS activists sabotage the internationally-backed peace process  hat is premised on advancing mutual understanding and respect between the parties.

Economic boycotts and divestment actions will not help the Palestinian people. The path to the two-state solution depends on creating an atmosphere of peace and reconciliation combined with economic development and political achievement. Blocking that path is the BDS Movement.

If you believe in the right of the Jewish people to be safe and secure in their historic homeland, I urge you to support this resolution.

If you believe in the right of the Palestinian people to their own state alongside, but not instead of, Israel, I urge you to support this resolution.

If you believe in a true peace process and oppose divisive, destructive tactics that attempt to cripple our ally Israel, I urge you to support this resolution.

If you believe that together, we can play a constructive role in ensuring that Israelis and Palestinians can work toward achieving mutual understanding, cooperation, and a better future for themselves, their children, and their grandchildren, I urge you to support this resolution.

If you are a New York City resident please contact your Council representative and say you support Resolution 1058-A

BDS Does Not Belong in the Park Slope Food Coop

I submitted the following letter to the Coop's biweekly newspaper., the Linewaiters' Gazette (LWG).  It was rejected for publication. I will address the reasons given for rejection in a separate post.

“Zionists should be sent to the gas chambers,” someone wrote on a bathroom wall at UC Berkeley – ground-zero of the BDS movement in the United States. “Death to Israel,” “Kill all the Jews” and multiple swastika graffiti have also been found on the Berkeley campus. These are the fruits of the hate promoted by the BDS movement.

Apparently it is a crime worthy of genocide to recognize the Jewish People as a distinct national group with a unique history, language, and culture, and to support their right to self-determination and self-preservation as an indigenous people in a portion of their ancestral homeland that is source of their culture. Further, by calling for this genocide is to be carried out using the same mechanism specifically designed by the Nazis for the extermination of the Jews 75 years earlier, the writer implies approval for the actual murder of one-third of world Jewry.

In our own Coop, a BDS supporting member has publicly expressed the desire that Orthodox Jews not be Coop members. In the Gazette, BDS members have:

• called for the support of a leading member of the terrorist group Palestinian Islamic Jihad (3/8/12,p.6).
• equated Israel with Nazi Germany (12/11/14, p.7).
• told Jews how they should understand their Jewishness (8/21/14, p.13 & 10/30/14, p.13)
• called for the dismantling of Israel (6/16/11, p. 10).

None of this has any relation to Palestinian human rights. None of this can be called “criticism of Israel.”

Well-intentioned people may support the BDS movement because they believe they are supporting Palestinian human rights. However, the BDS movement does not promote rights or democracy. It seeks to portray Israel’s very existence as incompatible with human rights. In doing so, it works to justify attacks upon Israel and Israel’s supporters.

In April, former U.S. Treasury Terrorism Analyst Jonathan Schanzer testified before Congress that the funders of the BDS movement in the US were also funders of Hamas, the terrorist group whose charter calls not only for the elimination of Israel but also the murder of ALL JEWS everywhere. The BDS movement is a part of a century-old effort of an elite, despotic Arab leadership to maintain its hegemony. The BDS movement works to further entrench a Palestinian leadership that has enriched itself through the prolongation of the conflict at the expense of the Palestinian people.

This is why so many of us oppose the BDS movement, and why I labeled it a “vicious racist movement.” This is not speech that should be protected in the Coop. The GCs’ decision to no longer allow the use of the meeting room for BDS-related activities is a wise one and a step in the right direction for returning normalcy to the Coop.

If you agree it is time to end the promotion of the BDS movement in the Food Coop, then please add your name to my petition.

Is Anti-Zionism a form of Anti-Semitism?

The Pope's answer:

In an email we got from Pope Francis:"Whoever does not recognize the Jewish People and the State of Israel falls in antisemitism"

— Henrique Cymerman (@Henrique_B_C) May 28, 2015

and on October 28, 2015, Pope Francis said at a meeting with Jewish leaders to mark the 50th anniversary of Nostra Aetate

“To attack Jews is anti-Semitism, but an outright attack on the State of Israel is also anti-Semitism.  There may be political disagreements between governments and on political issues, but the State of Israel has every right to exist in safety and prosperity.”

And President Obama, in an interview with Jeffrey Goldberg, in the Atlantic

On Israel, Obama endorsed, in moving terms, the underlying rationale for the existence of a Jewish state, making a direct connection between the battle for African American equality and the fight for Jewish national equality. “There’s a direct line between supporting the right of the Jewish people to have a homeland and to feel safe and free of discrimination and persecution, and the right of African Americans to vote and have equal protection under the law,” he said. “These things are indivisible in my mind.”

In discussing the resurgence of anti-Semitism in Europe, he was quite clear in his condemnation of what has become a common trope—that anti-Zionism, the belief that the Jews should not have a state of their own in at least part of their ancestral homeland, is unrelated to anti-Jewish hostility. He gave me his own parameters for judging whether a person is simply critical of certain Israeli policies or harboring more prejudicial feelings.

“Do you think that Israel has a right to exist as a homeland for the Jewish people, and are you aware of the particular circumstances of Jewish history that might prompt that need and desire?” he said, in defining the questions that he believes should be asked. “And if your answer is no, if your notion is somehow that that history doesn’t matter, then that’s a problem, in my mind. If, on the other hand, you acknowledge the justness of the Jewish homeland, you acknowledge the active presence of anti-Semitism—that it’s not just something in the past, but it is current—if you acknowledge that there are people and nations that, if convenient, would do the Jewish people harm because of a warped ideology. If you acknowledge those things, then you should be able to align yourself with Israel where its security is at stake, you should be able to align yourself with Israel when it comes to making sure that it is not held to a double standard in international fora, you should align yourself with Israel when it comes to making sure that it is not isolated.”

Anti-BDS Letter from Hillary Clinton

A number of news media outlets have already picked up a letter from Hillary Clinton to Haim Saban in which Clinton expresses her "alarm over the Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions movement."  Saying "we need to repudiate efforts to malign and undermine Israel and the Jewish people," Clinton asks Saban for advice on how to work "across party lines" to fight back against BDS.

Read the full letter below or download here.

For the Media

May 11, 2015 - This morning I woke up to find an editorial in the New York Daily News about  the  latest BDS effort at the Park Slope Food Coop.  The editorial is based on a report appearing at the The Indypendent written by a Food Coop member who attended the April General Meeting.  The editorial contains no original first hand reporting.

I love reporters.  I envy your writing abilities.  I had a great time talking to reporters three years ago. But I also have a day job.  This time please send your questions to my email stopbdsparkslope at gmail.com.  We will try to send you answers within 24 hours.  I think this will work better for everyone.

The Food Coop is an extremely successful experiment.  Starting with a few people 40 years ago who decided to collectively buy wholesale, it has grown into a $50 million/year business, employing some 50 people, and providing them with very competitive salaries and attractive benefits.  In addition, members save thousands of dollars a year on their food bill and we support local agriculture.

The Coop's Mission Statement includes:

We are committed to diversity and equality. We oppose discrimination in any form. We strive to make the Coop welcoming and accessible to all and to respect the opinions, needs and concerns of every member. We seek to maximize participation at every level, from policy making to running the store.

We welcome all who respect these values.

Yet, from time to time, for better or worse, because of the nature of Food Coop governance relies on the cooperative spirit and good will of its members, food coops - like colleges - are left vulnerable to exploitation by groups seeking to promote their political causes.  As the the blog Divest This! writes:

One answer has to do with our old friend ruthlessness.  For in a society, such as a college community, that values discourse and assumes people will resolve problems reasonably and amicably, how do you deal with an organization ready to trash the entire enterprise in order to torture and smear their political enemies?

 Please check back here for relevant articles as I post responses to the latest BDS effort.

How To Get Our House in Order
From the Perspective of an Israeli Coop Member

How To Get Our House in Order

The following was submitted by a Coop member who attended the April General Meeting at the Park Slope Food Coop.  She offers some insights into how and why the meeting got out of control, and suggestions for how we can do better:

Fully appreciating that the committees referenced below made good faith efforts to exercise their complex responsibilities, it was nonetheless not surprising that the April GM at one point devolved into a chaotic shouting match. The many reasons follow, with constructive suggestions for assuring order in the future.

THE AGENDA COMMITTEE (AC) made an error of judgment by scheduling a discussion about boycotting SodaStream in the "Occupied Palestinian Territories" (aka "disputed territories"). It was well-known by all relevant parties that the factory in question was closing one week from the meeting, information relayed in writing by SodaStream upon request from Coop management and forwarded to the AC. Therefore the discussion clearly revolved around a moot point and offered little but a third opportunity (2011 discussion, 2012 boycott referendum proposal, soundly defeated) to make the familiar, highly controversial claims repeatedly published (and refuted) for six years in the Gazette.
SUGGESTION: In future the AC might consider the appropriateness and value of a discussion/proposal based on an obsoleted premise, in this instance that there would be a factory to boycott.

THE CHAIR COMMITTEE (CC), with the unenviable task of making split-second parliamentary decisions, unfortunately lost control of some of the proceedings, not their fault alone given that all factions contributed to the ensuing chaos.

During the Open Forum an attempt to query the AC about the legitimacy of the discussion was ruled out of order despite meeting the relevant guideline providing "the opportunity for members to briefly submit general and specific questions regarding the operation of the Coop"1 (which naturally includes the AC). SUGGESTION: Future meetings would benefit from a reading of the brief guideline by the Chair prior to the Open Forum.

A later parliamentary attempt was made to question the validity of the discussion (Objection to Consideration of a Question), similarly rejected by the Chair.
SUGGESTION: In future the Chair might inform members about how to exercise their parliamentary rights2, (among other ways, by making a motion) detailed on easily overlooked handouts, which to facilitate order might be projected above the stage2.

Although the discussion was submitted by only two individuals, the Chair allowed six presenters, providing them a disproportionate time-advantage in the discussion. Irrelevant and out-of-context images of Israeli military were displayed, suggesting, without unambiguously depicting, Israeli abuses. This predictably provoked – unfortunately but understandably – a call to remove the images. To his credit the Chair repeatedly but futilely directed the projectionist to desist, but finally gave up when she refused, resulting in a lengthy shouting match.
SUGGESTION: In future the Chair should suspend the discussion until compliance with an order is achieved or remind members of their right to make a motion and vote on removing the images. (Objections were also made, but ignored, about a presenter provocatively imaging audience reactions from the podium).

Following management's reading of the letter about the imminent closing of the relevant SodaStream factory, some in the audience continued to disrupt, with unfortunately no effective restraint by the Chair. SUGGESTIONS: The Chair should offer disrupters a choice to desist or leave, and, if necessary, either escort them out or, again, suspend the proceedings until compliance is secured. In future, discussions about this incendiary, divisive topic (best avoided altogether), might benefit (sadly) from security presence as at the 2012 meeting.

Following the six-person presentation, the Chair directed alternating one minute pro and con responses, thus providing no reasonable opportunity for serious debate of the highly contentious material presented. SUGGESTION: For debates on such complex and controversial topics, a more equitable alternate format should be developed, allowing an equivalent counter-presentation by informed opposition representatives prior to the alternating, inadequate one-minute, pro and con responses.

Unfortunately, it can be claimed that the proceedings exemplified the very tactics encouraged and used globally by BDS advocates, who routinely disrupt Israeli events and speakers (this naturally doesn't excuse comparable -- understandable but unacceptable -- disruption from the opposing faction). In a sense, the presenters experienced what it feels like to be on the receiving end of their movement's own tactics. SUGGESTION: But now, we collectively – members, management, committees, and the Board of Directors – all need to reconsider allowing enduring divisiveness so far outside the boundaries of inclusiveness, courtesy, sensitivity and respect for the dignitary rights of all groups within our community, assuring harmony and cohesion above disruptive partisan politics only tangentially relevant to the Coop.

From the Perspective of an Israeli Coop Member

The following was written by Coop Member Yoav Gal following the April General Meeting of the Park Slope Food Coop.

I would like to apologize for the rowdy behavior exhibited during last week’s General Meeting. My expectation at the GM was to hear updates about the Coop and discuss on-going issues, not to be subjected to a political propaganda pageant. I ask the members to understand the reaction in this context. There may have been better ways to object to the BDS presentation, but there is just no possibility of just staying quietly in my seat in the face of baseless and pointless demonization of my people.

Hate speech cannot be allowed. We will not accept presentations alleging the evil or inferiority of Muslims, women, blacks, gays, Mexicans, or any other group of people, even though plenty of ‘evidence’ and audio-visual material can always be found to ‘support’ any kind of such ‘claims’. Similarly, I cannot accept the demeaning caricature of my people - the vibrant and pluralistic liberal democracy of Israel - as a “colonial, apartheid power oppressing the indigenous people.”

How can we tell that the BDS presentation was an Israel-hate rally? Let’s examine:

Can the proposed boycott of Sodastream help anyone? No. The ‘success’ of this campaign will cause 500 Palestinian workers to lose well-paid jobs with benefits and promotion opportunities.

Do the Palestinians support this effort? No. The workers of Sodastream expressed themselves against this campaign and even Mahmud Abbas, the Palestinian president, is against BDS.

Did the presenting group make and effort to present a thoughtful and balanced approach to their issue? No. They recited ready-made propaganda material, cherry-picked information, out context facts and outright lies.

Does the boycotting Israeli products in general has any other merit in the cause of justice? No.

Israel isn’t a colonial power, it does not practice apartheid, nor does it oppress any indigenous people. Zionism is a national liberation movement, whose greatest ‘fault’ is in creating a vibrant democracy in the Middle East.

Still, can we help the Palestinians? Of course, we can and should, though positive actions such as the proposed purchasing of Palestinian olive oil, among other initiatives.

Lastly, we need to be clear about the harm done by BDS. Demonizing lectures about my people makes the coop a non-welcoming place to me as an Israeli Jew. I will not continue my membership in an organization, which is unjustly antagonistic towards my fellow Israelis. A bigger problem still, is the potential of demonization to lead to violence. The threat of terrorism against Jews and Israelis in particular is real. Armed guards are already the norm in synagogues, schools and camps. In Europe, where the lines between political opposition and Anti-Semitism have been largely erased, the situation is such that Jews are simply packing up and leaving. We do not wish to see a similar situation in Brooklyn.

I ask that the coop leadership find the organizational means to put a stop to the continued community-divisive tactics of BDS at the coop.

We Are Our Own Worst Enemy

Last night BDS Round 2 began in earnest at the Park Slope Food Coop.  In the fall, BDS team submitted this item for discussion at a General Meeting:

We propose that the Coop boycott SodaStream products, which are manufactured on an illegal Israeli settlement in the Occupied Palestinian Territories.

Never mind that the plant at Mishor Adumim will stop production next week, and the discussion is meaningless, the group went on with its presentation of its item for discussion only, no vote. (See here for an explanation of PSFC democracy.)

The presentation was the usual parade of unsubstantiated BDS lies that are easily refuted.  The presentation also included slides of Israeli soldiers arresting people.  Slides presented without context and not related to SodaStream.

I am not proud of what happened next. I have a lot of criticisms to go around. But my harshest condemnations are for the people on my side.

Spontaneous audible protests from the audience began. The boos turned into chants of "Take Down the Pictures."

The Chair's call to order were ignored. People started getting out of their seats, and trying to block the screen and the projector. Shouting grew louder. Eventually, the Board of Directors came to the front of the room, and tried to call order.  Finally, the General Manager spoke, and order was somewhat restored.

The BDS group was allowed to continue the presentation.  There was continued heckling from the audience. The disruption lasted at lest a half hour.  There was a short comment period because time had run out for the meeting.  

This disruption was done by people I have known for years. People who were sitting near me. People who ignored me when I told them it was enough, it was time to stop.

There are no excuses for this behavior. The people who did this, the people who wouldn't stop the shouting and the heckling, they need to apologize. Publicly. It was wrong. I apologize for any contribution I had towards this.

There is a lot more to say about all of this, but that is for another time.

Support anti-BDS Effort at Northwestern University

Last month, the Associated Student Government (ASG) Senate at Northwestern University narrowly passed a resolution asking the university to divest from 6 corporations that do business with Israel.  The resolution is in support of the BDS movement.  The resolution is symbolic and the university has not changed its policy on investments.

I don't have a connection to Northwestern University, but a good friend who does has asked me to help circulate a letter expressing displeasure with the action of the ASG.  Please read below.  There is a link where you can add your name to sign the letter.

--------------------------------------------------------------------

Dear Fellow Northwestern University Stakeholder,

On February 19th, the Associated Student Government (ASG) of NU undergraduates passed a resolution, 24 to 22, calling on Northwestern University to divest of investment in six corporations. This resolution was proposed by NUDivest at the behest of the Boycott Divest and  Sanction Israel movement (BDS). While the resolution in itself does not reflect official NU policy, it does send an unhealthy and dangerous signal that the NU community supports the larger goals of BDS. Those goals demonize the State of Israel without any context as to the complexities of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, do not recognize the many human rights advances implemented by Israel, and overlook the human rights abuses advanced in certain Palestinian communities. BDS is forthright in its attempts to suppress discourse and impose an outcome. BDS seeks to boycott academic exchanges with Israeli universities and all commerce with Israel.  

We are asking only those connected to the Northwestern community to sign on to the letter via this link. The letter for your consideration is below.  You will be asked on the link to indicate your connection to NU either as a current student, alum, faculty member (past or current), parent of a student or alum, staff member, or donor.

We ask with gratitude that you forward this email to as many fellow Northwestern community members as you can.

Sincerely,

Scott Shay, WCAS '79, KSM '80

Samantha Stankowicz, WCAS '14

 

*******************************************************

Dear ASG Student Senate Members,

We are heartbroken.

On February 19th, the ASG passed a resolution endorsing a goal of the Boycott Divest and Sanction Israel (BDS) movement.

We encompass and represent the entire spectrum of those with opinions on ways to resolve the Israel-Palestinian conflict. None of us are happy with the status quo. We all want an agreement that allows for all the peoples in the area, whether they identify as Israeli or Arab or Jew or Muslim or Christian or any combination, to have the freedom to live lives of safety and security, peace, prosperity, and political empowerment. However, we are united in knowing that the conflict will never be resolved by the demonization of Israel or by brute sanction of Israel. It will be solved only by the type of discussion and conflict resolution which BDS would extinguish were it successful. NU has a proud tradition of providing a safe space for people of differing views. The implications of the resolution passed by ASG are a sad and tragic departure from that purple tradition which we all cherish.

We, the undersigned members of the NU community of all race, creed, color, religion and gender definition, declare that the resolution that you passed is not in our name.

**By signing this form you consent to being a signatory on this letter and recognize this letter may be disseminated on social media or news publications**

Sophistry

Sophistry - [sof-uh-stree] n. Reasoning that appears sound but is misleading or fallacious.

Sophistry is a great word.  I want to make this word  popular.

Sophistry possesses the gravitas missing from its famous yourger brother truthiness.  I am particularly enamored of the word sophistry, not only for its meaning, but also because of its assonance with bigotry and dishonesty.  I now have a new and improved BDS slogan - Bigotry, Dishonesty, Sophistry. But it only works if people know the word.

On the other hand, actual sophistry is not very nice at all. It is difficult to identify, making it effective. The arguments presented supporting BDS are filled with sophistry.  The logic is so convoluted it makes my head hurt. The wrong and incomplete information makes my blood boil.  Even though written by people with high academic degrees, it is still sophistry.

Sophistry must be identified to be countered. The essay collection The Case Against Academic Boycotts of Israel edited by Cary Nelson and Gabriel Noah Brahm exposes the many sophistries currently being promoted in academia against Israel and Zionism.  It is time to delegitimize the delegitimizers.

StandWithUs Discusses the BDS Movement

I will be featured in the 2nd of 3 internet video conversations about BDS.

Standing Up to BDS - a 3-part live, interactive roundtable discussion to analyze the BDS movement and effective responses to its tactics, presented by StandWithUS (SWU).  Viewers will be able to submit questions via live chat room.

• March 2, 2014          YouTube Video           BDS on the College Campus
• March 9, 2014          12 noon (EDT)            BDS and Community Business
• March 16, 2014        12 noon (EDT)            BDS and Academia 

All 3 sessions will be moderated by Dr. Michael Harris, community activist with StandWithUs San Francisco.

Session speakers:
BDS on the College Campus:

• Brett Cohen, SWU National Campus Program Director
• Hen Mazzig, Campus Coordinator SWU Northwest
• Max Samarov, SWU research assistant.

BDS and Community Business:

• Rob Jacobs, director of StandWithUs Northwest
• Barbara Mazor, one of the leaders of the successful effort to defeat the BDS movement at the Park Slope Food Co-op in Brooklyn.
• Roz Rothstein, StandWithUs founder

BDS and Academia

• Roberta Seid, director of research for StandWithUs
• Peggy Shapiro, Chicago community coordinator for StandWithUs

The real agenda of the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement against Israel is the elimination of the state of Israel. Learn how you can eliminate BDS, instead. 


The conferences will be conducted on the Vonvo platform.  It provides for video and audio feeds for up to 4 participants.  Viewers can watch the conference at the Vonvo website.  If you log in at Vonvo with a Facebook login, then you can also type in questions and comments in the live chat room during the conference.  Afterwards, the video will be available on YouTube; the channel in vonvodotcom.

Vonvo is best if using Chrome or Firefox as your browser.

Here is the link for the event at Facebook
Here is the Vonvo page at Facebook.

I hope you will be watching.

How to watch the event:
1. Make sure you are using the browser Google Chrome or Firefox (preferably chrome)
2. Good internet connection on your COMPUTER (mobile doesn't work)
3. Login in with your Facebook account to actively participate (not required)
Directions:
1. Go to www.vonvo.com using Google Chrome
2. click the "log in with facebook" button and sign in
3. scroll down to the "StandWithUs" channel
4. click the "Join Live Vonvo" button (dropdown will appear)
5. click the "View Live Vonvo" button
6. enjoy the discussion!!

Stigmatizing anti-Semitic Language

This post is updated on Aug. 3, 2013.

Last week I posted here in its entirety the essay Why Good Societies Stigmatize Anti-Semitic Language by Pascal-Emmanuel Gobry from a site called The American Scene.  At the time, The American Scene was down.  Now that the site is back up, and it is bad etiquette to reprint entire content from another site, I have edited the post to only have excerpts from the essay.  You should read the whole thing because it is that good.  I have added some of my own commentary and there is an interesting discussion in the comments section.  All boldface is my own.

Mr. Gobry begins:

Andrew Sullivan has noticed that some kinds of language that are sometimes used to criticize a lobby like the NRA are not considered acceptable to use to criticize Israel or “The Israel Lobby.”

Here is an example Andrew Sullivan uses: Why is it ok to say "Washington lawmakers’ obeisance to the gun lobby," but substituting "Israel" for "gun,"  is not ok?  Mr. Gobry answers the reasons are obvious:

The first obvious reason is that gun owners are not an ethnic group. In post-Enlightenment society, we recognize that people who are members of a group by choice are more open to criticism for being part of that group than people who are a member of that group by birth. I’m sure Andrew is well aware of how the emergence of a consensus of homosexuality as innate, and not chosen, has affected conversation about the gay community. We would cringe if President Obama (or a white Democratic politician, for that matter) was described as, say, “pandering to the Black Lobby” for addressing the NAACP.

The second obvious reason is that there is no record in history of a totalitarian regime embarking on a plan to exterminate all gun owners as a group and nearly succeeding, or of a major figure of a currently existing thuggish regime calling for the extermination of gun owners, or of a disturbing number of clerics of a major world religion calling for holy war on gun owners, nor is there a constant drumbeat of examples of gun owners, all over the world and for all of recorded history, being victimized in various ways for being gun owners.

The third obvious reason is that the language and ideology of gun owners’ alleged behind-the-scenes political influence, itself standing for a belief in their intrinsic malevolence and treacherousness, does not have a centuries-long history of being used as a spur for discrimination, mob violence, and massacres against gun owners.

Our society, quite reasonably in my view, has developed a taboo against the use of words associated with group hatred, as a way to stigmatize said hatred. White people can’t use the n word in contemporary polite American society because that word is associated with the memory of white people who used that word and bought and sold black people as chattel. The fact that it’s possible in theory to be a Non-Racist White Person and still utter the n word is irrelevant—and quite rightly so! And the taboo is all the stronger because there still are white racists around who use the n word and want to hurt black people. And we think it’s wrong. So we stigmatize it.

By the same token, and for obvious reasons, it would not be received in the same way if I wrote “Andrew Sullivan is gay” and if I wrote “Andrew Sullivan is a fag.” If I wrote the latter and defended myself by saying that I was only stating a fact, I would be ridiculed, for obvious and good reason. The word “fag” is not considered noxious because it refers to a gay person or because of the sound the syllable makes, the word “fag” is considered noxious because it is a symbol and instrument of group hatred.

And expressions like “Jewish lobby”, which carries the anti-Semitic trope that Jews are a shadowy clique that secretely controls the government have been—for centuries, around the world, to this very day in some places—used as spurs to mass violence.

Now, does this mean that it’s “impossible” to criticize the State of Israel, or America’s Middle Eastern policy, or AIPAC? Does it mean that Chuck Hagel is a dhimmi or an anti-Semite? Of course not. Does it mean that there are certain phrases that you may not use to be considered civilized? Does it mean you shouldn’t write just quite the same way about AIPAC—or the NAACP—as the NRA? Yes. Is this just? Absolutely.

Period.

And I could just leave it at that, but I’ll press on, because it is (very) important and I haven’t seen formally spelled out the argument for the pressing duty of combating anti-Semitism in all its forms, including rhetorical, including accidental. In contemporary society, when someone earnestly screws up about race, the opportunity to assert moral superiority is so strong that the opportunity to explain is almost never taken.

Taboos against using certain language against certain groups is always tied to the violence that has been exercised against these groups, because the language is seen, quite reasonably, as both symbolizing and facilitating that violence.

And so, just like it would be impossible to understand the contemporary American taboo against the n word without understanding slavery and Jim Crow, if we want to understand why we have taboos against language that is redolent of anti-Semitism we need to talk about the Holocaust.

Here there are several paragraphs about the horrific nature of the Shoah.  Mr. Gobry asks "how is the Holocaust relevant today"

There are several reasons why. The first and most obvious one is that anti-Semitism is alive and well today, and eliminationist anti-Semitism to boot.

The second one, and also an aspect of the uniqueness of the Holocaust, is that it was perpetrated by a society that could reasonably be called the most advanced of its time.... [and Mr. Gobry elaborates.]

The other reason why the Holocaust is very relevant today is that for all the evil genius of Hitler and his acolytes, it was enabled precisely because of the pre-existence of anti-Semitism. The anti-Semitic tropes that the Nazis believed, used and reinforced have a very long history—one that continues up to this day. In some corners of the world, The Protocols of the Elders of Zion are still brisk sellers. Not in America, of course—no, we’re above that.

These anti-Semitic tropes—the idea of the plotting, scheming Jew, of a Jewish Lobby which controls the government behind the scenes, of the traitorous Jew who serves Zion and not his homeland—they were the fertile terrain from which genocide could spring. And it is an ever-fertile terrain: while the Holocaust obviously stands unique, Jews have been the victims of anti-Semitic violence in every era, in every country, down to this day. And anti-Semitic tropes are the enabler and the spur.

Indeed, there is a connection between language to attitudes to actions. I agree with Mr. Gobry we should eschew the use anti-Semitic tropes. I fear we are being conditioned to see harm to Israel or even Jews as not all that tragic, as "didn't they deserve it anyway for being so evil?"

I would also add one point when responding to Andrew Sullivan's initial inquiry.   Sullivan is writing about comments on the gun lobby following the failure of the Senate to pass legislation that would expand background checks on gun purchasers.  The legislation had the support of nearly 2/3 of the American public.  Gun violence is definitely harmful to Americans.  As the Senators voted against the wishes of their constituents, we can talk about "obeisance."

However, the sympathies of nearly 2/3 of Americans are with Israel.  The benefits of the US-Israel relationship are well documented.  Congressional support for Israel is consonant with the wishes of the American people.  Using the word "obeisance" would be a mischaracterization, to say the least.