"From the River to the Sea": a Phrase that Elicits Dishonesty from Zionists, and Cowardly Mis-leadership from Anti-Zionist Leaders

Harvard President Gay forgets what the University's motto, Veritas, means.

Read the full article here.

THE DISHONESTY

Harvard University President Gay, completely ignoring the University’s motto, Veritas (Truth), said:

“Our community must understand that phrases such as ‘from the river to the sea’ bear specific historical meanings that to a great many people imply the eradication of Jews from Israel and engender both pain and existential fears within our Jewish community.”

Gay, in her infinite wisdom (President of Harvard, after all, right?) chose not to explain truthfully the “specific historical meaning” of the interpretation of the “From the River to the Sea” phrase as (supposedly!) advocating the “eradication of Jews from Israel” and “existential fears.”

Had Gay the slightest desire to speak the truth (Veritas, you know) then she would have explained that it was the first Israeli Prime Minister, David Ben-Gurion, who told the infamous lie about “eradication of Jews from Israel.” In 1961, David Ben Gurion lied to Israeli Jews by declaring with no evidence whatsoever that Arab armies intended to “push all the Jews into the sea, dead or alive.”

Had Gay the slightest desire to speak the truth, then she would have explained that the vast majority of Palestinians want what the Palestine Liberation Organization under Yasser Arafat officially aimed for, which is to make ALL of Palestine (“from the River to the Sea!”) a secular democratic state in which Jews and non-Jews would be equals under the law and live in peace with each other.

Had Gay the slightest desire to speak the truth, then she would have explained what this perfectly just and noble and GOOD “from the River to the Sea!” goal—the goal of making ALL of Palestine “from the River to the Sea” be a secular democratic state in which all citizens were equal under the law regardless of ethnicity or religion—would mean. ees

She would have explained that it would mean the eradication of Israel (Yes!) as the kind of state that it asserts that it is and must be, namely:

• a State of the Jewish People,

• a state ONLY of the Jewish people,

• a state in which ONLY its Jewish citizens and NOT the 20% of non-Jewish citizens are the official sovereign power,

• a state in which the non-Jewish citizens are by law second class citizens (this links to a plain English description of Israel’s blatant discrimination against non-Jews under the law; can Harvard President Gay read English? Just asking),

• a state in which the BASIC LAW (essentially its constitution) says it is illegal for anybody to stand for election to the legislature (Knesset) if they do not endorse the principle that Israel must do whatever it takes (and this has meant seven decades of violent ethnic cleansing of Palestinians and denying them their Right of Return in defiance of International Law) to ensure that the great majority (David Ben-Gurion said it had to be at least 80%) of the population was always Jewish.

Had Gay the slightest desire to speak the truth, then she would have explained that Israel is no more morally defensible right to exist than does a “State of the White People” (like the American Confederacy or the South African apartheid state) or a “State of the Master Race” like the Third Reich or a “State of the Muslim People” or a state of any specific ethnic/racial category to the exclusion of others who are also its citizens. This is an idea that LOTS of ordinary people without a Harvard diploma grasp very easily, and an idea that even a Harvard University president, although perhaps only with great effort, should be able to grasp, right?

Had Gay the slightest desire to speak the truth, then she could have explained that the just aim of abolishing the Jewish State, like the just aim of abolishing the Confederacy or the Third Reich or the South Africa Apartheid state does not mean killing all the people who live in it, obviously! Ordinary people understand this distinction. Is President Gay unable to do so? Does President Gay think that the Union was aiming to kill all the people who lived south of the Mason-Dixon line, and the aim of anti-Nazis was to kill all the Germans, or the anti-apartheid people wanted to kill all the whites in South Africa? No? Then why does she act as if she thought there was some truth to the Zionist propaganda that says anti-Zionists want to “eradicate” all the Jews living in Israel? President Gay, if she had any desire to speak the truth, would have exposed how false is this Zionist propaganda.

But no! President Gay is going along with the Big $ pro-Israel alumni who demand

“the suspension of students involved in the HBS confrontation [that was an anti-Zionism ‘die in’ at the Harvard Business School—J.S.] and disciplinary actions taken towards students chanting ‘eliminationist’ statements, specifically referencing the phrase ‘from the river to the sea.’”

President Gay could, of course, have decided to explain that the Big $ pro-Israel individuals ARE ANTISEMITES because they support the Israeli government’s attack on ordinary Jews that Zionist leaders have been waging since the days of the Holocaust, as one can (and should!) read about here (for the days of the Holocaust) and here (for recent days.)

But no! President Gay (Veritas, remember), chose to remain silent about the truth and instead (with her “the eradication of Jews from Israel” reference) to promote the Zionist “push all the Jews into the sea, dead or alive” lie that David Ben-Gurion invented back in 1961 to terrify ordinary Jews into obedience to their upper class oppressive Zionist rulers.

THE COWARDICE

None the Zionist lies about “From the River to the Sea” would have any traction if it were not for the fact that anti-Zionist leaders totally accept, rather than refute, the Zionist lie that says the conflict is one between “the Palestinians versus the Jews.” The truth (explained and proven in great detail here) is that the conflict is between the have-nots (both Palestinian and Jewish) and the haves who oppress them (both the billionaire ruling class of Israel and the Palestinian upper class rulers in the Palestine Authority and Hamas.)

But the anti-Zionist leaders never express this truth, i.e., the CLASS nature of the conflict. As a result, they tell their anti-Zionist followers to do things that emphasize the false (Palestinians versus Jews) framework, a framework that makes any support for the Palestinian have-nots equate to hostility to the Jewish have-nots, and vice versa. Thus these anti-Zionist mis-leaders tell their followers to wave the Palestinian flag and chant “Palestine will be free from the River to the Sea” (with no explanation of what that means) and NEVER to express any support for the Israeli Jewish working class people who are severely economically oppressed by the Israeli billionaire class that gets away with it ONLY by using the Palestinian bogeyman enemy that it creates by treating the Palestinians like dirt. Read all about this here and here.

Here’s how the Zionists persuade people that ant-Zionists are antisemitic. The Zionists assert the lie that Zionist violence against Palestinians is for one single noble purpose: to make Israeli Jews safe. And therefore, when anti-Zionists oppose this Zionist violence they are opposing that which is done to make Jews safe, which is antisemitic in EFFECT if not intent.

The anti-Zionists could easily refute the Zionist lie by talking about CLASS, about how the Israeli ruling billionaire class oppresses ordinary Israeli Jews and funds Hamas for that purpose, and does not whatsoever make them safe. But anti-Zionist leaders never talk about class; instead they only about “The Palestinians versus the Jews” and they never talk about the anti-working-class PURPOSE of Zionist violence against Palestinians—to create the bogeyman enemy it uses to control and oppress the Israeli Jewish working class.

As a result, anti-Zionists are today a SITTING DUCK for the accusation that they are antisemitic. For some reason, anti-Zionist leaders are AFRAID to talk about class. This is a cowardice problem, and it is crippling the anti-Zionism movement.

If anti-Zionists on college campuses organized teach-ins (like the Vietnam war teach-ins of the 60s) to educate student about how Zionist leaders are the enemy of BOTH ordinary Palestinians AND ordinary Israeli Jews, then they would be building a truly massive anti-Zionism movement consisting of people who were formerly pro-Israel, including LOTS of Jews who were formerly passionately pro-Israel. It is the cowardice of our anti-Zionism leaders that is preventing this from happening. (Or maybe it’s something more sinister than cowardice, as I discuss here.)