Margaret Atwood Accepts Israel's Dirty Prize Money -Still Shameful!

105 posts / 0 new
Last post
remind remind's picture

Self-promotion a wonderful thing, eh.....

Hoodeet

Re. Chomsky denied entry to West Bank. (Sorry if I'm sidelining the thread, but Nos 44 & 45 opened this topic and I had to take the bait.)

Interesting that in the interview with Amy Goodman this morning on DN! neither of them mentioned B.D.S. and Israel's full-throttle effort to counter it. All Chomsky and Goodman did was speculate with no real basis and ended up as mystified as when they started talking. That was disappointing.   When I heard the news I immediately thought that the State, and the IDF in particular but also the Interior Ministry, were afraid that by going only to Palestine this time, Chomsky was implicitly (or explicitly) boycotting Israeli institutions where he's spoken before, or they might have simply been concerned that the event would be used by the BDS movement somehow, particularly in the context of the debate now raging in several countries about the academic boycott. 

There seems to be no other cogent explanation.

So it does fit in with the Atwood thread after all, no?

NDPP

Planet Chomsky Vs. Dershowitz's Orbit

http://www.gilad.co.uk/writings/planet-chomsky-vs-dershowitzs-orbit-by-g...

"As it happens, Chomsky's border incident yesterday may well be the biggest contribution the American academic has ever made to the anti-Zionist struggle.."

N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

Elvis Costello wrote:

It is after considerable contemplation that I have lately arrived at the decision that I must withdraw from the two performances scheduled in Israel on the 30th of June and the 1st of July....
Some will regard all of this an unknowable without personal experience but if these subjects are actually too grave and complex to be addressed in a concert, then it is also quite impossible to simply look the other way.

"... it is also quite impossible to simply look the other way."

Bravo! Bravo! Bravo!

 

NDPP

Margaret Atwood Cashes In

http://dissidentvoice.org/2010/05/margaret-atwood-cashes-in/#more-17202

"Ms Atwood's acceptance of the Dan David Prize, whose previous laureates include Al Gore and Tony Blair, [and Atom Egoyan] is viewed by Ms Atwood's critics as a betrayal to the ideals she supposedly represents and an unwitting endorsement of Israel's race exclusive policies.."

Ms Atwood's blandly centrist posturing is symptomatic of a malady particular to the cosseted and fossilized members of a wealthy nation's cultural elite, for whom 'free speech' is a largely unexamined term that by default, advocates the right of establishment opinion makers laboring for the warlord and robber baron class to set the agenda for public discourse."

Frustrated Mess Frustrated Mess's picture

From the article linked above:

Quote:

“We writers belong to a space one can call ‘Republic of writers’ and do not do cultural boycotts,” Atwood sniffed in response, conveniently overlooking her support of sanctions and cultural boycotts of Apartheid-era South Africa. More recently, the author pulled out of the fledgling Emirates Airline international festival of literature to protest the organizers’ decision to withdraw their invitation to an author whose book was considered too controversial. Curiously, the free speech advocate couldn’t spare a similar show of solidarity with the blacklisted Palestinian writers whom she is unlikely to meet in Israel.

Apparently she does do cultural boycotts.

 

Cueball Cueball's picture

"...stooge-laureate..."

Laughing

And this guy says he "is no poet".

Frustrated Mess Frustrated Mess's picture

Atwood accepted the prize on May 11th and to date has issued no statements other than to regurgitate the nonsense she has already stated. An excellent article: http://www.countercurrents.org/versey090510.htm

I probably don't matter much to Ms. Atwood or her publishers, but I do read and I am a book buyer with a respectable library. My wife and I have been Margaret Atwood fans and we do own Year of the Flood which will likely be the last Atwood novel we purchase. I can't fully express my disappointment which has only been deepened with her sycophantic, contradictory, and self-serving comments. It is worth noting the award she accepted now places her in the company of the war criminal and mass murderer, Tony Blair. She must be proud.

Ripple

http://www.haaretz.com/haaretz-authors-edition/the-shadow-over-israel-1.293653

 

Quote:

I was recently attacked for accepting a cultural prize that such others as Atom Egoyan, Al Gore, Tom Stoppard, Goenawan Mohamad, and Yo-Yo Ma had previously received. This prize was decided upon, not by an instrument of Israeli state power as some would have it, but by a moderate committee within an independent foundation. This group was pitching real democracy, open dialogue, a two-state solution, and reconciliation. Nevertheless, I've now heard every possible negative thing about Israel - in effect, I've had an abrupt and searing immersion course in present-day politics. The whole experience was like learning about cooking by being thrown into the soup pot.

The most virulent language was truly anti-Semitic (as opposed to the label often used to deflect criticism). There were hot debates among activists about whether boycotting Israel would "work," or not; about a one-state or else a two-state solution; about whether a boycott should exclude culture, as it is a bridge, or was that hypocritical dreaming? Was the term "apartheid" appropriate, or just a distraction? What about "de-legitimizing" the State of Israel? Over the decades, the debate had acquired a vocabulary and a set of rituals that those who hadn't hung around universities - as I had not -- would simply not grasp.

Some kindly souls, maddened by frustration and injustice, began by screaming at me; but then, deciding I suppose that I was like a toddler who'd wandered into traffic, became very helpful. Others dismissed my citing of International PEN and its cultural-boycott-precluding efforts to free imprisoned writers as irrelevant twaddle. (An opinion cheered by every repressive government, extremist religion, and hard-line political group on the planet, which is why so many fiction writers are banned, jailed, exiled, and shot.)

None of this changes the core nature of the reality, which is that the concept of Israel as a humane and democratic state is in serious trouble. Once a country starts refusing entry to the likes of Noam Chomsky, shutting down the rights of its citizens to use words like "Nakba," and labelling as "anti-Israel" anyone who tries to tell them what they need to know, a police-state clampdown looms. Will it be a betrayal of age-old humane Jewish traditions and the rule of just law, or a turn towards reconciliation and a truly open society?

Time is running out. Opinion in Israel may be hardening, but in the United States things are moving in the opposite direction. Campus activity is increasing; many young Jewish Americans don't want Israel speaking for them. America, snarled in two chaotic wars and facing increasing international anger over Palestine, may well be starting to see Israel not as an asset but as a liability.

Then there are people like me. Having been preoccupied of late with mass extinctions and environmental disasters, and thus having strayed into the Middle-eastern neighbourhood with a mind as open as it could be without being totally vacant, I've come out altered. Child-killing in Gaza? Killing aid-bringers on ships in international waters? Civilians malnourished thanks to the blockade? Forbidding writing paper? Forbidding pizza? How petty and vindictive! Is pizza is a tool of terrorists? Would most Canadians agree? And am I a tool of terrorists for saying this? I think not.

NDPP

Great. So now she can leverage her big fat sellout to Israel for even more shekels. She coldly and clearly broke a global cultural boycott of a people being genocided by those who paid her to do so. For money. Big money. Never forget her not terribly large talent is first and foremost as a fiction writer and she will ever after attempt to prove herself right no matter how wrong. Just like her Zionist paymasters though, she fails to convince us.

remind remind's picture

Atwood can piss off, now that she knows she came down on the wrong side of history her words have changed....somehat, she still thionks her accpetance was righteous.

 

N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

Interesting. Atwood, in her poetic contribution, comes right up to "I own, therefore I am," in order to appear to reject this proprietary ideology. Clever, but so what? Everyone knows what $he did. We still know where the money went.

So too, with the regurgitation of "two state solutions" reflecting her level of understanding. Yes, MA, you are a toddler that wandered into traffic. And some, lucky for you, have taken pity on you. Others see you as a dumb *uck that ought to confess her lack of understanding. But there are many who think maybe it wouldn't be such a bad thing if you got run over. In describing Atwood as a "useful idiot" to their enemies, some Zionist commentators have made clear that this is their view. Just look at the comments section if you don't believe me. Perhaps it is the great author's aim to be held in contempt ... by both sides? Hint: not a good idea. Shit or get off the pot, ma'am. 

I must, however, commend Atwood for actually observing and commenting on "the shadow". The shadow knows.

Unlike the fiction writers she describes, author Atwood will not face banning, jailing, being exiled or shot.  And, by the end of the article she manages a very timely - and may I say - bourgeois promotion of HER new book. Clever again.

So there's no real attempt to dig into the substance and depth of the issues. Life is going to have to be a teacher here. I hope she comes around eventually.

remind remind's picture

she won't, as a matter of fact I am viewing her works in a completely different light nowadays, and interestingly, I am going back to my first opinion, that I was reluctantly persuaded from, years ago now.

No Yards No Yards's picture

I don't get it ... Atwood, a relatively powerless artist took some award from Israel and she becomes an outcast ... yet the "heart of the Canadian left", the NDP basically falls silent on the issue, and no one bats an eye.

I'm not defending Atwood, but put into perspective her sin is meaningless compared to how the NDP now addresses the Israel/Palestinian issue.

 

RevolutionPlease RevolutionPlease's picture

I thought artists were ahead of and lead the NDP on these issues?

NDPP

No Yards wrote:

I don't get it ... Atwood, a relatively powerless artist took some award from Israel and she becomes an outcast ... yet the "heart of the Canadian left", the NDP basically falls silent on the issue, and no one bats an eye.

I'm not defending Atwood, but put into perspective her sin is meaningless compared to how the NDP now addresses the Israel/Palestinian issue.

NDPP

Absolutely so. Denial and "the others are worse.." Pathetic.

Fotheringay-Phipps

I read the piece in Haaretzand actually thought it was pretty good. The poem and the novel excerpt that framed it were quite moving. I know Atwood isn't proposing some of the solutions that have wide currency in this forum. But she should be respected for her ability to change her mind when confronted with massively immovable facts (unlike, say, Bibi Netanyahu) and for her refusal to dismiss complexity. She's bound to get some things wrong and to offend a few people on all sides of the question. After all, she appears to be thinking about Israel without the aid of ideology: this is like climbing Mount Everest without oxygen.

N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

She hasn't changed her mind at all yet, AFAIK. She's just pissing off the racists and Zionists. Lecturing them. Hence the really, really nasty comments about her ... comments completely lacking from the left.

NDPP

Both Atwood and Egoyan should give back the Zionist Dan David prize money. Otherwise we must assume the obvious

Frustrated Mess Frustrated Mess's picture

Did Margaret just notice the state of the people of Gaza for this article? She was oblivious to their plight before travelling to Israel to be fete and be feted by the direct beneficiaries of stolen land, culture, water, and wealth? How nice.

No Yards No Yards's picture

NoDifferencePartyPooper wrote:

No Yards wrote:

I don't get it ... Atwood, a relatively powerless artist took some award from Israel and she becomes an outcast ... yet the "heart of the Canadian left", the NDP basically falls silent on the issue, and no one bats an eye.

I'm not defending Atwood, but put into perspective her sin is meaningless compared to how the NDP now addresses the Israel/Palestinian issue.

NDPP

Absolutely so. Denial and "the others are worse.." Pathetic.

Well. I don't think I'm trying to say ignore Atwood because the NDP is worst (not sure if that's what you're actually suggesting, so correct me if I'm wrong) ... I'm just trying to point out that some people criticizing her also defend the NDP's stance.

Personally I'd condemn both, but since the NDP are in a better position to represent and uphold democratic principles of human rights and justice, I don't see how one can condemn Atwood but then try and present the fluff pieces that the NDP are putting out on the issue as somehow being anything near representing principles of human rights and justice.

 

Polunatic2

Quote:
Personally I'd condemn both,

Nothing against condemnation but sometimes you catch more bees with honey. The NDP needs to feel some internal pressure from their own base about BDS. It's one thing to "quibble" about the efficacy of using the "A" word. It's quite another to be off-side on the only non-violent strategy that has any chance of applying the kind of pressures that will motivate Israel to negotiate a settlement and begin to comply with international law. That's the debate they need to lead with both the Cons and Libs. It won't be pretty because there is division within the party about BDS and we know how the Cons and Libs would try to reframe the debate. Maybe the NDP needs to get someone on one of those boats? 

NDPP

the NDP has had quite enough 'honey' and to no effect. If the NDP base wishes to push them on BDS, best of luck to them. But the Palestinians need some relief sooner than that faint hope promises. Condemn both say I.

Frustrated Mess Frustrated Mess's picture

Quote:

"Appeals to reason, international law, U.N. resolutions and simple human decency mean -- it is now obvious -- nothing to Israel," Banks wrote.

"I would urge all writers, artists and others in the creative arts, as well as those academics engaging in joint educational projects with Israeli institutions, to ... convince Israel of its moral degradation and ethical isolation, preferably by simply having nothing to do with this outlaw state," he said.

Sci-Fi author Iain Banks urges israel boycott

melovesproles

Banks isn't only a sci-fi writer.  I actually haven't read any of his sci-fi but some of his straight stuff was decent.  I really liked Complicity, and Whit and The Wasp Factory weren't bad reads.  His more recent fiction seemed a little dull.

Catchfire Catchfire's picture

And, while Atwood is equivocating, Swedish crime writer Hennin Mankell was on the Sofia:

"I think they went out to murder."

Quote:
In an exclusive interview with the Guardian in Berlin, Mankell, 62, described the "horrifying moment" when he realised the Israelis had chosen to attack the ships "deep in international waters".

"Our idea had been a non-violent, non-fighting back method. But we soon realised the Israelis had chosen the real, real ugly solution to attack in international water … It was only when I got on my flight home that I realised that people had died in the attack, when the stewardess told me on the plane," he said.

He called on the international community to step up its pressure on Israel to end its blockade of Gaza and said he would like to see an investigation into whether Israel could be prosecuted for its alleged attack on the ships, believing it had set out to deliberately kill protesters. Nine Turkish citizens, one of whom had a US passport, were killed in the attack.

"I think the Israeli military went out to commit murder," Mankell said. "If they had wanted to stop us they could have attacked our rudder and propeller, instead they preferred to send masked commando soldiers to attack us. This was Israel's choice to do this.

"And it was the most stupid thing they could have done, because look around, Israel has never been so criticised in the world as of today, and if you ask me, this blockade will be over within the next six months."

-=+=-

(reposting this here, from duplicate thread).

Atwood's Haaretz [url=http://www.haaretz.com/haaretz-authors-edition/the-shadow-over-israel-1.... (quote above) mentions "killing aid-bringers on ships in international waters" so it seems to have been written after the attack on the Gaza flotilla.

The article is very strange, and seems to be part mea culpa, part "speaking truth to power".

In it, Atwood appears to be saying that her understanding of Israel had basically been frozen in 1956 (when she had attended a model UN parliament). She also says that of late her mind has been on environmental disasters, and so was nearly vacant on Middle Eastern matters.

Then, after accepting said prize she says she was suddenly "thrown into the soup pot" of present-day politics. But as for these politics -- is Israeli an apartheid state? is calling it that "de-legitimatizing"? -- Atwood dismisses them as university debating club stuff. How could she be expected to understand it?

It's quite a defense. Simultaneously Atwood paints herself as naive about what was happening in the Middle East, but also, from her lofty position as a non-academic writer grappling with ecological catastrophe, above them. This is why she took that prize.

As for the rest of the article: it's a plea to the master to stop kicking his slave in the face. You're going to kill him! (and hurt your foot in the process).

Honestly, this piece reminds me of Michael Ignatieff's mea culpa in the NY Times about the Iraq War. Though, of course Atwood's is far better written.

bagkitty bagkitty's picture

melovesproles wrote:

Banks isn't only a sci-fi writer.  I actually haven't read any of his sci-fi but some of his straight stuff was decent.  I really liked Complicity, and Whit and The Wasp Factory weren't bad reads.  His more recent fiction seemed a little dull.

[Iain Banks Fanboy Mode]

Takes out a cudgel and bashes melovesproles about the head and shoulders till my arm gets tired - such is the punishment to be doled out to those who are less than wildly enthusiastic about my favourite author.

[/Iain Banks Fanboy Mode]

The science fiction books are, by and large, excellent (I have doubts about Feersum Endjinn - I think Russell Hoban already exhausted that ground with Ridley Walker). I would also plug The Crow Road as the most approachable of his mainline books for someone looking for an introduction, although Complicity is by far my favourite [I mean, who else writes extended left wing revenge fantasies?}. His non-fiction book, Raw Spirits, would probably be well received by a number of posters here, it has it all: cars, scotch and a running commentary on the insanity of Gulf War II.

Oh, I am drifting here, sorry, but fanboy mode was fully engaged.

Polunatic2

I thought Atwood's statement was credible, very well crafted and I will take her at her word that these are sincere reflections. I don't necessarily agree with every word that she wrote but she has certainly gone further in her criticisms than many other writers and cultural workers. Many people are unfamiliar with the Middle East and with politics in general. Because she's a writer doesn't mean that she knows anything about the mid-east. I'm not sure that comparing her to Iggy is really a valid analogy. Her critique of Israeli policy in that piece is certainly not something we've heard from the liberal party. Why not welcome her voice to the growing chorus of (diverse) opposition to Israel's policies? 

Unionist

Thank you, Pol2, for a voice of reason.

Like some upthread, I find it difficult to hold an individual cultural worker - however famous and iconic - to the same (or higher) standards as the leader of a Canadian political party (any four of them) - nor even as a trade union leader (e.g. Buzz Hargrove) or FN leader (e.g. Phil Fontaine) who visit Israel on Zionist-financed luxury junkets and come back praising it to the skies. Atwood is not elected by anyone to represent the stand and the aspirations of the Canadian people.

It should also be understood that the BDS movement has not exactly captured the overwhelming majority of Canada's people, businesses, organizations, leaders yet. Thus, Atwood can't yet be described as an isolated pariah in an anti-apartheid sea.

Our movement against the racists, aggressors, and murderers of that arrogant state is a work in progress. We need all the allies we can get, and of all kinds. For crissakes, even Brian Mulroney played a small, momentary role in the isolation of South African apartheid. If someone of Atwood's stature shows that they are capable of reflection and learning, we should nourish and welcome that. We don't have to agree with where she's gotten to. We definitely have to encourage her, and many others whose stands we don't like, to keep moving in the right direction.

George Victor

Ah, reason instead of puerile, armchair rant.   Will babble be recognizable after this?

Polunatic2

I believe that people make mistakes. I also believe that people can change their views and make up for their mistakes. Do we not need a broad, growing, international movement? The "once an enemy once always an enemy" model of politics might be fine for some here in Canada but when lives are at stake, can the movement afford to write off potential allies? 

NDPP

She can't keep the money for this to mean anything..as well it would be the decision of the Palestinian organizations as to whether she becomes an allie since it was their cultural boycott she refused.

Catchfire Catchfire's picture

Unionist wrote:
Atwood is not elected by anyone to represent the stand and the aspirations of the Canadian people.

True, but I think this opinion undervalues the role of artists in society--all art is political, of course, and Atwood as crafted a career, deservedly in many respects, positing herself as a champion of human rights, a powerful critic of injustice, authoritarianism and coercion, and a voice for humanity. So I would argue that she does indeed bear responsibility in such a globally relevant issue. We can't excuse Atwood for accepting such a politically tainted prize when she has made a life out of being political, especially when she couches her acceptance in the historical influence of authors, poets and playwrights. She can't pontificate on the value of art and artists in a troubled society and then abrogate responsibility.

I'm happy to see that Atwood has reconsidered--but what does this reconsideration mean until she gives back or redistributes the prize money in the name of righteousness?

Michelle

[Edited out off-topic remark to George Victor - no sense in engaging.]

Anyhow, on topic:

I agree with Polunatic, but I see other people's points, too.  I agree that people can change their opinion - I've done so lots of times over the years on babble when presented with compelling arguments, or just over a few years of having experiences that have made me realize otherwise.

But as others have said, is it a meaningful gesture if she keeps the money?

Caissa

Puerile seems to be the word of the day at Babble, Michelle. Wink

Catchfire, maybe Atwood could donate some of the money to Rabble. Laughing

al-Qa'bong

Quote:

We can't excuse Atwood for accepting such a politically tainted prize when she has made a life out of being political, especially when she couches her acceptance in the historical influence of authors, poets and playwrights. She can't pontificate on the value of art and artists in a troubled society and then abrogate responsibility.

 

Yes; it is odd how the author of such a political work as The Handmaid's Tale could be so clueless on a subject that has been so central to world politics over the last 50 years.

Frustrated Mess Frustrated Mess's picture

al-Qa'bong wrote:

Quote:

We can't excuse Atwood for accepting such a politically tainted prize when she has made a life out of being political, especially when she couches her acceptance in the historical influence of authors, poets and playwrights. She can't pontificate on the value of art and artists in a troubled society and then abrogate responsibility.

 

Yes; it is odd how the author of such a political work as The Handmaid's Tale could be so clueless on a subject that has been so central to world politics over the last 50 years.

As well, as is evidenced by her latest effort at rationalization (did she write that for herself?) demonstrates, as does so much of her work, she is incredibly well read and current with news and events. So her claim that this is all new to her sort of rings hollow.

N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

Atwood's been lecturing both sides, ffs, barely hiding her Olympian disdain. Methinks this is a strategy not a learning curve. One step forward ... and one step backwards. I've expressed the view that I'd like to see her come around ... but I'm not holding my breath.

Here's a reminder: the BDS campagn includes cultural matters. Cultural matters are included partly because this is part of the Israeli strategy; to draw cultural workers into legitimizing that racist regime. It's a wedge that can be used to crack open opposition to the regime. This has to be attacked HEAD ON. It means high profile artists and public figures are going to wind up with blood on their hands if they blissfully ignore civil society requests in favour of their "higher" aims. There are no higher aims. That's the friggin' point.

Unless babblers think armed struggle is the way to go for the Palestinians, then these sorts of campaigns aren't important. They're critical, ffs.

Unionist

Agreed on all points, N.Beltov.

But how do we get there?

I don't think we'll get there by painting Margaret Atwood (of all people) as the poster-child of opposition to BDS. She isn't. Others are. The movement is nascent. We shouldn't strangle it at birth. Have Ignatieff, or Duceppe, or Layton called for BDS? Has anyone? How many trade unions? How many cultural figures? How many FN organizations? How many women's organizations? Damned Pride Toronto bans criticism of Israel. We have our work cut out for us. I have a very very hard time grasping how attacking Atwood - especially when she starts to falter and waiver - will facilitate that work.

N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

It's about not being silent about the famous author cheerfully and ignorantly zipping over to Tel Aviv to pick up her zillion shekels. Even a failure in convincing this particular artist may very well influence less well known artists.

And that's a good thing.

Civil society organizations will have to lead. Not the political parties in Parliament. And maybe that's not such a bad thing for a left that has so few recent victories to its credit.

Unionist

I agree that civil society organizations will have to lead - entirely, absolutely. I'm just questioning how we get there. I didn't say we should be silent about Atwood. I just think we should look realistically where the movement is and decide carefully whom to condemn, whom to persuade, whom to criticize - whom to target. Otherwise, it's just crying in the wilderness and setting oneself up for defeat.

 

N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

Well, turn the whole thing upside down. Atwood isn't hurting, is she? Better to target someone significant who can take it. I mean, she's what? A million bucks - less 10% - richer? Or was it half a mill?

N.Beltov N.Beltov's picture

Supplemental for Unionist: You and I both know that there are ideological leaders in social life. Bring them around, and big things happen.

 

Next.

-=+=-

Another point to consider is that "literary" writers may be a lost cause, and not worth trying to turn.

So far, for example, the only writers who have come out against the Gaza flotilla atrocities are genre writers:  Iain Banks (science fiction) and Henning Mankell (mystery novels).

Why this is?  My theory is that literary writers are too heavily invested in what Noam Chomsky has called the "doctrinal system" -- the system of official opinion enforced on cultural workers by newspapers, think tanks, university departments, TV newscasts etc.  The careers of literary writers depend on winning public prizes sponsored by governments or corporations, journalism for important journals or newspapers, and teaching gigs at universities.  Publicly being on the wrong side of official opinion on an issue important to those in power (like Israel, as opposed to gay rights) means possibly being denied a prize, a position, or an article in the NY Times.  Your career withers as a result.

Genre writers, on the other hand, make careers writing for mystery novel fans, sci-fi fans etc.  There are usually enough of these readers that they can survive on writing alone.  And since these are popular genres, those who write in them are not policed for orthodoxy by the powers-that-be.  (Though, I wonder if this will change as genre writers begin to have public profiles equal to those of literary writers).

It is also instructive to note that it is popular musicians like Carlos Santanna and Elvis Costello who are leading the BDS movement among artists.

Perhaps the best that can be hoped for is that literary writers like Atwood are neutralized in whatever cover they might give to Israeli crimes.  Judging by her Haaretz article, this approach may have succeeded in Atwood's case.

Unionist

N.Beltov wrote:

Supplemental for Unionist: You and I both know that there are ideological leaders in social life. Bring them around, and big things happen.

Hear me, O N.Beltov: I agree.

Political activists have often criticized the less enlightened; the point, however, is to change them.

 

bagkitty bagkitty's picture

The point, Unionist, is to toilet train them, rather than running after them to change them...Wink

-=+=-

Compare the shipboard [url=http://www.guardian.co.uk/theguardian/2010/jun/05/flotilla-raid-henning-... of Henning Mankell, the mystery writer, who was on the flotilla, with what Atwood has written.

remind remind's picture

Funny, Atwood is a rabble sustainer, or founder, or both. so I do not for 1 minute believe she "knew nothing".

Suckers are born every minute it seems, especially if ya buy into that bs line... it is an example of the elite doing what they want to do to fill their pockets and to pat themselves on the back about how wonderful they believe they are, and then use plausible deniability to cover their actions

 Guess everyone who believes her now forgot her FIRST statement that absolutely contradicts this one.

remind remind's picture

Polunatic2 wrote:
I believe that people make mistakes. I also believe that people can change their views and make up for their mistakes.

And she has made up for it how?And tis well beyond a mistake, it is ego that figured, IMV, that she was above criticism.

Quote:
 Do we not need a broad, growing, international movement?

Please do explain to me just how someone, who ignores a cultural BDS, and accepts a 1/2 million dollars from the people being boycotted, is going to grow an international movement?

In fact, the reality is her actions actually harm a broad and growing international movement. It can be viewed no other way.

Quote:
The "once an enemy once always an enemy" model of politics might be fine for some here in Canada but when lives are at stake, can the movement afford to write off potential allies? 

Obviously she is an ally to no one but herself, in the primary, and perhaps an ally to Israel in the secondary, given her actions.

Pages