Talk:James Petras

From Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

This article is within the scope of WikiProject Biography. For more information, visit the project page.
Biography Portal
Start This article has been rated as Start-Class on the project's quality scale. [FAQ]
This article is supported by the Science and academia work group.

Contents

[edit] Early Discussions

I've added the passage below, because without it, the article gives the misleading appearance that James Petras is a a rather mainstream socialist, when in fact other socialists (e.g., Sam Manuel) have found some of his theories to be hateful.

Some of his more controversial essays have argued:

  • On September 11 The idea that radical Islamists carried out the attacks of September 11 is a "conspiracy theory"; it is more likely that the attacks were the work of a secular group. There is evidence that prior to September 11, Washington had planned to overthrow the Taliban, and it is plausible that Washington used the attacks as a pretext for going to war in Afghanistan. [1]
  • On Danish Cartoons The Mossad, with the help of the Ukranian Jew Rose, helped plot the Danish cartoon conflict pitting the West against Islamic peoples. This greatly facilitated Israel's capacity to implement its "genocidal policy" , a "Nazi-like economic siege over 4 million Palestinians, intended to starve them into surrendering their democratic freedoms." This "cultural conflict at the service of genocide" is a "crime against humanity".[2]
  • On Jews Loss of manufacturing jobs for workers in New York City was no doubt facilitated by "the ethnic-class differences between the six-figure salaried Jewish labor bosses and the low-paid Asian and Latino workers". The myth of war for oil "is circulated by almost all the major progressive Jewish intellectuals and parroted by their Gentile followers, who are in word and deed prohibited from mentioning the AIPAC word in any public meetings or manifestos. The power of the minority of politically active Jewish financiers in the pro-Israel lobby is spreading far beyond the area of US foreign policy into the cultural, academic and economic life of the US." To retaliate against professors Mearsheimer and Walt, who wrote a paper critical of The Israel Lobby, all the major Jewish publications "have launched together with all the major Jewish organizations, a propaganda campaign of defamation...and pressure for their purge from academia." While most Jews oppose the Iraq war, "they are not willing to criticize the pro-war Jewish lobby or to mention Israel ’s involvement in precipitating the war through its occupation of Palestine." [3]

Precis 12:34, 6 May 2006 (UTC)

Uh, should this guy be listed under anti-Semites? I dislike trying to sort through the difference between 'anti-Zionism' and anti-antisemitism, but he keeps on harping about 'Jewish Power', and 'Jewish Financiers'. Also, his language in this article http://www.axisoflogic.com/artman/publish/article_21643.shtml kinda seems to be directed at Jews, not 'Zionists'. I don't really know; any comments? Gilead 10:48, 12 May 2006 (UTC)

I would say no, for the following reason. Anti-semitic writings don't necessarily prove anti-Semitic motivation. Here is an example. In 2003, Tony Judt wrote a column in the NYT proposing the elimination of the Jewish State. Many (who feel that a catastrophe would result for millions of Jews living under Islamic rule) find Judt's idea to be anti-Semitic. However, if Judt truly believes that his suggestion is a just one, then one can't say on this basis that he himself is an anti-Semite. As for Petras, he may be an anti-Semite, but I'd prefer to err on the side of caution. Precis 20:58, 12 May 2006 (UTC)
I think the difference between anti Zionist and antisemitic is crucial, and folks are too quick to use both interchangeably.

You have a point, but he keeps going on about the 'Jews'. He seems to be implying that Jews control the media, US foreign policy, and even public debate. To be honest, he sounds like David Duke; he blames Israel/Jews/Zionists for manipulating the United States, and seems to be purposefully playing on the whole 'Jewish Control' theory. For these reasons, I think he should be labeled anti-semitic, but I'll wait for a consensus on the matter. Gilead 11:53, 14 May 2006 (UTC)

The case is not as clear cut as it is, e.g., for Larry Darby. Precis 20:27, 15 May 2006 (UTC)

The bit about Israel Shamir is wayy off. He is neither a Nazi nor a Swede -- absolute misinformation. He was born Jewish, served in the Israeli Military, and is since a convert to Episcopal Christianity.

"The bit about Israel Shamir" is ABSOLUTELY accurate. His Swedish name as well as Nazi politics were conclusively proven by the anti-facist publication "Spotlight" three years ago. It is true that he is now an Episcopal Christian -one who in his speeches and writings preaches the most sweeping lies and libels against "THE JEWS" and Jewish people worldwide (at one point comparing them to "a virus"). He has also supported genocidal violence against them, as can be seen on his website recently where he saluted Saddam Hussein for "bringing the war to the Jews" i.e the scud missles he dropped on Isreali civilians. This is but one of many examples (there is also his Pro-Hitler holocaust denial), most of which can be seen on "Shamir's" own website. Others have been exposed by genuine pro-Palestinian actvists such as Ali Abunimah & Hussein Ibish. In any case, it is now clear that Petras himself now shares this overall line of argument.

The question shouldn't be is Petras anti-semitic but are his ideas worth considering and is he accurate. To me he is a mixed bag; has some extreme ideas and his "sources" may be people who share his prejudices. Alternatively some things seem to be well referenced and his cast of characters related to OSP is also presented in Kevin MacDonald's "Understanding Jewish Influence". Looking up some of these characters lead me to others, all with similar profiles, all part of the American Enterprise Institute and seemingly all major players in determining our Mid-east policy; frightening! Had I not followed up on Petras' remarks I don't think I would have known of how big and close knit these people are. A real setup for "group think".Rcnau 05:47, 7 March 2007 (UTC)rcnau

[edit] Petras Views

When the separate book article got deleted eons ego, i started the views section. I noticed that also got speedily deleted. Interestingly, the latest edit line reason for the deletion is that it is "POV." Indubitably, it is Petras' POV. More that that, some of it just plain sociological fact- just statistics from Richard Cohen and Forbes. The rest his opinion. I'm not going to get into a wheel war. Just want to point out the facts and opinion. There should be room in an encyclopedia for diverse balancing views. And there should be more in the views section than the Jewish and Israel stuff.

  • Power of Israel in the United States

Petras has put his views in a book on this topic. He puts forth the thesis that American Jewry are less than 2% of the population, yet represent 25-30% of U.S.'s wealthiest families (citing Forbes). He asserts that they weild their wealth effectively. As an example(citing Richard Cohen in the Washington Post) -- supplying 60% and 35% of the total contributions respectively of the American Democratic and Republican political parties. Petras maintains that little public discussion is allowed about this financial power.

Petras maintains that this supposed Jewish influence in the Unites States affects Israel and Middle East Warfare. Petras has the view that Israel has engaged in ongoing military adventures with U.S. support and he has the view that these actions are contrary to U.S. national interest and are inexplicable without the Lobby connection. He repeats the analysis that neoconservatives embroiled America into the Iraq War under pretextural reasons to further greater Israel's interest. He has claimed that neoconservative Jewish organizations accurately reflect what he sees as the "dual loyalties" of the vast majority of American Jews. He further notes that pro-Israel neoconservative hawks are now urging war with Iran. He coins a new term -"Zioncon."

Petras analyzes the Global War or Terror as overblown and a way to mischaracterize resistance movements as "terrorists" and delegitimitize them.

Petras engages in an eight part analysis of Noam Chomskys criticsm on the "Lobby." He disagrees with Chomsky. "

  • Godspeed John Glenn! Will 11:02, 12 May 2007 (UTC)

here's my point about POV from the edit history of main article

  • "# (cur) (last) 06:52, 17 May 2007 Humus sapiens (Talk | contribs) (2,994 bytes) (Reverted edits by 24.193.199.143 to version 130128579 by Bertilvidet (rv POV allegations of Jewish conspiracy. Shhh))
  1. (cur) (last) 05:01, 17 May 2007 24.193.199.143 (Talk) (5,097 bytes) (return to previous NPOV uncensored article)
  2. (cur) (last) 17:11, 11 May 2007 Bertilvidet (Talk | contribs) (2,994 bytes) (rm POC edits) "
  • Godspeed John Glenn! Will 11:52, 17 May 2007 (UTC)

Edit Wars continue

    1. (cur) (last) 05:38, 25 August 2007 24.193.194.112 (Talk) (5,128 bytes) (Undid revision 153390783 by Sesel (talk) reversal of POV vandalism) (undo)
  1. (cur) (last) 17:53, 24 August 2007 Sesel (Talk | contribs) (2,987 bytes) (this is an unsourced opinion piece) (undo)
  2. (cur) (last) 17:33, 24 August 2007 24.193.194.112 (Talk) (5,128 bytes) (return to previous NPOV uncensored and fully contextualized article) (undo)
  • Godspeed John Glenn! Will 12:13, 25 August 2007 (UTC)

[edit] The Power of Israel in the United States

I began reading Petras' book The Power of Israel in the United States. At first the san serif type face made reading difficult. After the intro and well into the first chapter I jumped to chapter 13 and his attack, yes attack on Noam Chomsky. His sharp edged tone continued with every word I read, and to the point that it made me question his motives. I ended reading all 15 Petras points of contention on Chomsky and found most to be unsubstantiated and mostly his wishful opinions. Maybe sometime later I will try reading Petras in the future. 24.113.130.49 18:51, 23 September 2007 (UTC)

Citations??????? Anti-Defamation League???? Finkelstein??? Petras as an "anti-jewish racist??" —Preceding unsigned comment added by 134.84.33.81 (talk) 18:08, 2 April 2008 (UTC)

[edit] Current POV Content and WP:Personal Attacks/ Please Note New Arbitration Resolution on Israel/Palestine and Related issues

Since I can see this already has become a heated topic, please see Wikipedia:Requests_for_arbitration/Palestine-Israel_articles which encourages civil and cooperative editing. It also creates a working group that intends to much more quickly and effectively deal with dispute resolution on problems that arise in editing articles related to these topics. I hope that anon IP 207.29.128.130 will refrain from accusing people of racism and nazism for removing WP:POV material. Also the other material about his book should be sourced or replaced with sourced material which I might do myself when get a chance. Carol Moore 16:53, 22 January 2008 (UTC)CarolMooreDC [[User talk:Carolmooredc|{talk}]

[edit] Fair use rationale for Image:The power cover.jpg

Image:The power cover.jpg is being used on this article. I notice the image page specifies that the image is being used under fair use but there is no explanation or rationale as to why its use in this Wikipedia article constitutes fair use. In addition to the boilerplate fair use template, you must also write out on the image description page a specific explanation or rationale for why using this image in each article is consistent with fair use.

Please go to the image description page and edit it to include a fair use rationale. Using one of the templates at Wikipedia:Fair use rationale guideline is an easy way to insure that your image is in compliance with Wikipedia policy, but remember that you must complete the template. Do not simply insert a blank template on an image page.

If there is other fair use media, consider checking that you have specified the fair use rationale on the other images used on this page. Note that any fair use images lacking such an explanation can be deleted one week after being tagged, as described on criteria for speedy deletion. If you have any questions please ask them at the Media copyright questions page. Thank you.

BetacommandBot (talk) 02:50, 12 February 2008 (UTC)