Barnett, T.P.M. (2006). Israeli nationalism v. globalism. Thomas P.M. Barnett :: Weblog. December 31, 2006. Available online: http://www.thomaspmbarnett.com/weblog/2006/12/dave_goldberg_wrote_tom_what.html.
My post which criticized Tom Barnett’s attack on Israel now is just one response amongst many. Jimmy Carter’s intellectual dishonesty is well known, but now Tom Barnett says that such is not important:
Carter’s argument needs to be dealt with head on, not seemingly discredited on the basis of factual errors and interpretations.
Dr. Barnett doesn’t rehash “identity” (whatever he means by that), but now is concerned with the concept of race:
In the end, Israel’s biggest long-term problem is that its nationalism is race-specific in a globalizing world where such state-sponsored “affirmative action” comes off as hopelessly discriminatory, whether you’re talking Muslims in Tel Aviv or Paris or Los Angeles.
The central claim in the above sentence is that Israel is a Racist State.
Very lefty, and very wrong. Israel is a “Jewish State,” certainly, but what does this mean? A race is a genetically related breeding population, of which “Jews” are not. There are historical breeding populations, such as the Cohenim, who make a disproportionate percentage of Israel’s population, but then the Cohanim make up a disproportionate percentage of America’s population, as well.
The “Jewish” in “Jewish State” refers to membership in a recognized a hybrid patrilineal/matrilineal tribe, and membership is not effected by skin color, skull formations, height, degree of genetic relatedness, etc. Barnett would be accurate to say that Israel is a patriotic state, but then so is America. Barnett would be accurate to say that Israel is a tribal state, but then are the Indian Reservations he describes as “prosaic.”
Still, Barnett’s post was good to read before I begin the Spring 2007 semester. One of the classes I am taking, Genetic Development, features a discussion on Leftist interpretations on race (see my four part series on the subject: 1, 2, 3, 4). Clearly, that brand of pseudo-racialist mumbo-jumbo has spread beyond the halls of psychology departments to infect even top-notch globalization pundits.
