“I think the big problem here is that you are valuing certain groups above others.
None of you have a problem with statistics suggesting that “men run the world”. Or that, whites have a disproportionate presence among university faculty. Or that, wealthier countries have vastly disproportionate power in the world. I think there are valuable lessons to draw from realizing that whites, men, and the wealthy have disproportionate power and presence.
And, IF (and that’s IF) Jews hold disproportionate power in the world or in important groupings, then I also think it is important to note this possibility too.
By saying it is right to talk about male privilege, and white privilege, and so on, but not (possible) Jewish privilege, YOU are actulaly discriminating. Being hypocritical and closed. You are taking the injustices of the past based on race and gender, and reversing them. Creating new silences and hierarchies.
You have said time and time again on here that “Jews” are not a homogenous group. Well, neither are whites or men or (quite frankly) evangelical Christians. But you still disagree with male dominance of institutions. Or the domninance of whites in many important organizations or groupings.
Likewise, you believe that we cannot consider the ethnicity of major Jewish individuals now, because of what Jews AS A GROUP have suffered in the past. But then you insist that we cannot analyze people’s motivations or station-in-the-power-system AS A GROUP, because groups are irrelevant to discussion. So, you will exempt people from analysis AS A GROUP, but you demand we not discuss their ethnicity, because their predecessors suffered AS A GROUP. That’s a total double standard. “

If you strip out the ugly anti-semitism from the article—if you are left with much at all, and if you are generous—there is a point to be made, which is that “half of the most influential neocons in the US are almost certainly Zionists.”

Questioning the tenets and the political influence of Zionism is not anti-semitism. In fact, Zionists are partly to blame for a confusion between Judaeism (a religion and a race) with Zionism (a political viewpoint) by labelling anything that does question Zionism as anti-semitic.

Of course, finding out whether someone is or is not a Zionist is significantly more difficult than finding out whether someone is a Jew. And there are degrees of Zionism, from relatively moderate to extreme, so ultimately you must take these people on their professed views rather than lump them in an elastic and disposable category. Adbusters took the easy, bigoted shortcuts (if, in fact, they were aware of the distinction at all).

Incidentally, I did a rather more lighthearted and (I would venture) less reprehensible survey of influential neocons on make-believe.org last year—taking as my sample all the signatories to the Project for the New American Century’s founding statement. Going alphabetically though, I only made it to G. Short attention span.