Block and Futerman make case for Israel

A small excerpt from Marco den Ouden's review of The Classical Liberal Case for Israel by Walter Block and Alan Futerman. 

A New Book Makes a Solid Case for Israel and Zionism | Savvy Street | Marco den Ouden:

May 30, 2024 - "I was asked to review a new book supporting both Israel and Zionism, The Classical Liberal Case for Israel by Walter Block and Alan Futerman.... I had a review of well over 5000 words divided into a discussion of Block and Futerman’s book followed by a critique based on ... elements they chose to ignore. I opted to publish the critique as a stand-alone essay called The Battle for Israel’s Soul without mentioning the book. Now I am presenting the other side of the story: Block and Futerman’s compelling case for the moral right of Israel to exist and the moral right of the Jewish people to have a homeland, namely Zionism.... 

courtesy Amazon..com.

"The authors argue forcefully for the legitimacy of the state of Israel as a Zionist enterprise. They provide considerable documentation to support their charges.... The basic thesis of their book, they state, is that 'The Land of Israel was built up and developed by Jews who were unjustifiably expelled from their homeland thousands of years ago and are now back to reclaim their lost property and add to it by building and developing otherwise virgin land. It is really as simple as that.” (xxvi)....

"In Chapter 1 they argue that some parts of ancient Judea are demonstrably of Jewish origin.... They also contend that there are Jews alive today who can be genetically traced to these ancient Jews.... In Chapter 2 — Zionism — they argue that Zionism, the political movement promoting a Jewish homeland state, namely the country of Israel, is justified on a number of counts. They point out that emigration to Palestine took place long before the 1948 UN partition that created the state. 'It arose from the spontaneous actions of hundreds of thousands of Jews who returned to Zion in order to build their homes, and only much later their state.' (37) Cultural Zionism preceded political Zionism.... They challenge the idea that 'the Jews somehow stole the land from Arabs,' arguing that Jewish migrants to Palestine purchased land from existing owners, some of them absentee landowners. They purchased uncultivated land, and in many cases, land that had been regarded as uncultivable. And they homesteaded unowned (government-owned) land.... 

"Chapter 3 on The Palestinian Fiction Factory, the longest chapter in the book at 70 pages (excluding bibliography) argues that claims that Palestinians were expropriated and/or forced from their land are false.... Jewish land was either bought at exorbitant prices, much of it from non-resident Arab landowners, or it was homesteaded on land declared as uncultivable. Jewish entrepreneurship turned much barren land into productive farmland. As a result, there was an influx of Arabs, increasing the Arab presence in the area. They were drawn by Jewish wealth and the opportunities it presented. So, far from ethnic cleansing, Jewish settlement encouraged Arab immigration into the area.  All Jewish land was either purchased or homesteaded, they aver. None was forcibly taken.... 

"Section 4 of the chapter on The 'Expulsion' Plan discusses the immediate aftermath of the UN declaration. It argues that Israel’s Arab neighbors launched an aggressive war to destroy Israel and that Israel had the legitimate right to self-defense. The Arab aggressors warned Arabs resident in Palestine to flee for their own safety. Many did. The objective of the war was Israeli genocide, to wipe Israel off the map. Israel encouraged Arabs to stay. Arabs who opted to stay in the state of Israel now comprise twenty percent of the population.... Regarding alleged massacres of Arabs such as Deir Yassein, 'there was no policy of massacres, and Israeli authorities investigated and even condemned such incidents.' (emphasis added) (Benny Morris in Kramer et al., “Counter-Error: Separating Fact from Fiction in the Middle East,” The Washington Institute, October 27, 2016, page 95)....

"[In] Chapter 6: Critique of the Classical Liberal Case for Anti-Zionism — the authors critique Murray Rothbard’s analysis of the Israel/Palestine conflict.... Rothbard’s position is that Zionism was an offshoot of British imperialism..... But this is untrue, the authors argue. They cite Ilan Troen’s 2011 study which argues that the first forty years of Jewish migration to the area took place under the Ottomans. It had nothing to do with imperial expansion.... While they acknowledge that the Balfour Declaration supported the Zionist enterprise during the British Mandate, in fact, according to Charles Bard, the British reaction to waves of Jewish immigration in the '30s following the rise of the Nazis was to restrict such immigration to appease the Arabs.... 

"The authors argue that Rothbard is totally wrong in his analysis of events post-partition in 1948. 'Contrary to Rothbard, the Jews accepted the partition and the Arabs who already lived in Jewish areas were an integral part of the new State of Israel (and treated as such)'.... But at the time of partition, 'seven Arab armies invaded Israel after it was completed. Why should Israel be blamed for the resulting situation when it was only defending itself from outside attack?' (265) Moreover, Rothbard offers 'no explanation of why and how a new state built virtually entirely on homesteaded or purchased areas, labored on and developed by Jewish majorities, constitutes an aggression against the collective of Arabs of the entire Middle East'.... 

"As I noted earlier, I also found a lot to disagree with, points I elaborate on in my separate essay, The Battle for Israel’s Soul. But this essay looks at the positive points they make, points that should be noted and bear repeating:

1. Zionism was a cultural movement long before it became a political one. Jews started emigrating to Israel, their historic homeland, from the late 1800s on, decades before the creation of the state of Israel.
2. No land was usurped from Arabs. It was either bought, often at exorbitant prices, or homesteaded on unowned land deemed uncultivable.
3. Arab antisemitism was rife before the creation of the state of Israel. The Grand Mufti of Jerusalem himself was a virulent antisemite and concluded a pact with Hitler to exterminate the Jews.
4. When the state of Israel was created, its seven Arab neighbors launched an immediate war against the new state, expecting a quick and easy victory. Israel was, from day one, a victim of aggression by its Arab neighbors.
5. Decades of peace talks and attempts at a two-state solution have been consistently rejected by Palestinian authorities, no matter how favorable the deal was for the Palestinians.
6. Israel has repeatedly been the victim of suicide bombers and rocket attacks by Palestinians.
7. The Palestinian Authority pays and incentivizes Palestinian terrorists to the tune of $300 million a year or 22% of its foreign aid budget.
8. The Palestinian Authority forbids trade with Israel and selling land to an Israeli is a capital crime.
9. Hamas uses human shields and builds missile launch sites and tunnel hideouts under and near schools and hospitals and other areas populated by civilians. It uses its citizens to create martyrs.
10. Anti-Zionism in the form of BDS is completely one-sided. Only Israel is targeted. Egregious tyrannies and dictatorships are completely ignored.
11. There are double standards in the treatment of Israel, even by its parent and creator, the United Nations. Israel has been condemned by the UN more often than every other country in the world combined. The violent, fascist, repressive, misogynistic state of Iran has been censured a mere six times by the UN compared to 68 times for Israel. Russia the invader of Ukraine, Cuba the operator of extensive repressive political prisons (See Against All Hope by Armando Valladares), and China the largest mass-murdering regime in the history of the world, have never been censured by the UN. Not once!

"These are just a few of the points that Block and Futerman make. Despite some drawbacks that I pointed out in my other essay, this book deserves a hearing."

Read more: https://www.thesavvystreet.com/a-new-book-makes-a-solid-case-for-israel-and-zionism/

Is Zionism a libertarian movement? | גלעד אלפר | October 1, 2023:

Appeals court OKs Block's suit against NY Times

NY Times must face defamation lawsuit over professor's slavery comments -  Jonathan Stempel, Reuters:

August 15, 2017 - "A federal appeals court ... said the New York Times Co. must face a defamation lawsuit by a Louisiana economics professor who said it quoted him out of context by saying he described slavery as 'not so bad.'

"The 5th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals revived claims by Walter Block, who teaches at Loyola University, over a January 26, 2014, front page article about libertarianism and a potential presidential candidacy of Senator Rand Paul, a Kentucky Republican who later ran for the White House.

The article, 'Rand Paul’s Mixed Inheritance,' also quoted Block as saying the retailer Woolworth’s had a right to exclude blacks from its lunch counters because 'no one is compelled to associate with people against their will'....

"Block, a self-described libertarian, said that while he used the words attributed to him, the reporters Sam Tanenhaus and Jim Rutenberg distorted their meaning by omitting necessary context. Block said this made him appear racist, despite his having always been a 'bitter opponent' of slavery.

"A lower court judge dismissed the case, but the three-judge appeals court panel found a 'genuine issue of material fact' as to whether the article was false and had a defamatory meaning.

"'If, as Block has pleaded, he stated during the interview that slavery was "not so bad" except for its involuntariness, a reasonable jury could determine that the NYT’s decontextualized quotation falsely portrayed him as communicating that chattel slavery itself was not problematic - exactly the opposite of the point that he says he was making,' the panel said.

"The court also found it premature to dismiss Block’s claim that the Times acted with actual malice....

"The judges on the appeals court panel were appointed by Republican presidents.

"Tanenhaus and Rutenberg are also defendants in the case, which the appeals court returned to U.S. District Judge Ivan Lemelle in New Orleans."

Read more: https://www.reuters.com/article/us-tillerson-asia-afghanistan/tillerson-pays-flying-visit-to-afghanistan-to-discuss-u-s-strategy-idUSKBN1CS1PM
'via Blog this'

Ron Paul coalition fragments in 2016

Where are all the Ron 'Paulite' libertarians in 2016? - Daniel Libit, CNBC:

April 14, 2016 - "Last month, Walter Block, a libertarian professor of economics and long-time acolyte of Ron Paul, pinched his nose and co-launched a group, Libertarians for Trump.... While he finds much of Trump's domestic agenda odious, Block very much likes Trump's noninterventionist foreign policy positions.

"Still, Block insists his group ... advocates only for Trump as the Republican nominee, and it intends to promptly disband after the primary. Then, Block said, even his vote is up for grabs. 'If it was Bernie [Sanders] versus Donald, I would vote for the Libertarian [Party candidate] for sure," he told CNBC.com. 'If it was Donald versus Hillary [Clinton], I would have a much harder time. I would have trouble deciding.'

"His conundrum is not unique among his kind. Four years after its political awakening, and in the absence of an obvious rallying point, the Ron Paul coalition finds itself in a diffuse, conflicted and confused diaspora. Paul's devotees .. are now erratically strewn across the political spectrum of the 2016 election, ... attaching themselves to Trump's populism, Ted Cruz's conservatism and even Sanders' socialism....

"The current state of the Paul coalition ... suggests ... its support had much more to do with Paul's outsiderism, than his libertarianism. It is this reality that dawned too late on the presidential campaign of his son, Kentucky U.S. Sen. Rand Paul, who thought he could expand on his father's base of support by appealing to establishment Republicans as well as true libertarians ... the campaign's internal polls found that of Iowa voters who said they supported Ron Paul in 2012, only about a third identified generally as having libertarian leanings....

"Paul commits his time to leading the Campaign for Liberty and the Ron Paul Institute, a foreign policy nonprofit.... But perhaps Paul's greatest political legacy is Young Americans for Liberty, a libertarian student organization that Paul is not formally affiliated with, but which grew out of his 2008 presidential campaign. It currently counts 600 college chapters and 200,000-plus members....

"Cruz, despite Paul's withering criticisms, has arguably made the most consistent effort to attract his former supporters, even name-checking libertarians in his Iowa Caucus victory speech. Prior to Rand Paul dropping out of the race, Cruz had already snatched the support of Iowa state Sen. Jason Schultz, who endorsed Ron Paul in 2012, and Joel Kurtinitis, an activist who served as Paul's regional director. Cruz also won the endorsement of former Libertarian Party presidential candidate Bob Barr, who has gotten crosswise with Paul in the past....

"But at least one political organization sees a unique opportunity this election — the national Libertarian Party. 'This is a year where things are so uncertain, and where the two parties are split among themselves, that it could be a very big opportunity,' said Wes Benedict, the Libertarian Party's executive director. Past nominee Gary Johnson's 1,275,871 votes in 2012 represented a high-water mark for the party in its 44-year history....

"During the 2013 Virginia gubernatorial race, Libertarian Party candidate Robert Sarvis ended with almost 7 percent of the vote, the most a third-party candidate has netted in the South since 1970.

"Immediately after Rand Paul's exit from this year's nominating contest, the Libertarian Party saw notable spikes in new donors, according to figures provided to CNBC.com. The party is on the ballot in 32 states (and Washington, D.C.) — the most of any third-party — and Benedict says he's confident it will be on all states' ballots for November."

Read more: http://www.cnbc.com/2016/04/14/where-are-all-the-ron-paulite-libertarians-in-2016.html
'via Blog this'

Walter Block forms Libertarians for Trump

Libertarians for Trump - LewRockwell - Walter Block:

March 15, 2016 - "Dr. Donald Miller (donaldwmiller@gmail.com) and I (wblock@loyno.edu) are starting up a new group to be called Libertarians for Trump.

"LFT has its work cut out for it in mobilizing massive support for Donald Trump within the libertarian community.... There are several issues upon which libertarians do not and cannot support Donald Trump. For example, protectionism. But, typically, regarding the issues where Mr. Trump deviates from libertarianism, so do the other candidates.

"And, also, we readily admit that the presidential nominee of the Libertarian Party (unless they nominate someone like, ugh, Bob Barr) will very likely have views much closer to ours than those of Mr. Trump.

"But, the perfect is the enemy of the good. It is our goal to throw our weight behind the candidate who has a reasonable chance of actually becoming President of the United States whose views are CLOSEST to libertarianism.

"When put in this way, it is clear that The Donald is the most congruent with our perspective. This is true, mainly because of foreign policy. And, of the three, foreign policy, economic policy and person liberties, the former is the most important. As Murray Rothbard and Bob Higgs have demonstrated over and over again, US foreign policy determines what occurs in economics and in the field of personal liberties. Foreign policy is the dog that wags the other two tails.

"We readily concede Mr. Donald Trump is no Ron Paul on foreign policy or anything else for that matter. However, compared to his Republican alternatives, the Donald stands head and shoulders above them. He has said, time and time again, things like 'Look at what we did in Iraq. It’s a mess. Look at what we did in Libya. It’s a mess there too. And we’re going to repeat our mistakes in Syria? Not on my watch.' Would Cruz or Rubio ever say anything like that? To ask this question is to answer it. And, very importantly, who is the one candidate who went out of his way so as to not antagonize Russia and Premier Putin? It is the Donald, that is who. Do we really want to fight World War III with Russia? With Mr. Trump at the helm, we minimize the chances of this catastrophe occurring... Yes, future President Trump wants a strong military, but with only a few exceptions, fewer than the other Republican candidates, only to defend our country

"Please consider joining our new group, LFT. There are no dues or fees. All you need to do is give me your name, email address (which we will not use) and affiliation (professional and/or just mention the city and state you live in). We will release the list of names of LFT members once we reach 100 participants. I ask that you do this not because in this way we may have some effect on a Trump Administration although there is an outside chance we might (he is now beset upon from so many sides, and so unfairly, that he might well appreciate the relatively small support we can give him). I ask you to do this, rather, because it is the right thing to do; he is, of all the major candidates for the office of President of the United States, the one most closely, albeit very far from perfectly, aligned with our beloved libertarian philosophy. If you know of other essays written in support of Mr. Trump, either by a libertarian, or, emphasizing the fact that his views are more aligned with our own than those of other major candidates, send them to us so that we can add them to our bibliography of such literature."

https://www.lewrockwell.com/2016/03/walter-e-block/libertarians-trump/
'via Blog this'

Walter Block to Canadian libertarians: Run for LPC

Open Letter to Canadian Libertarians from Walter Block | The Dollar Vigilante:

May 21, 2015 - "'“Why Canada needs more election debates' from the April 23, 2015 edition of Maclean’s Magazine ... mentions only six political parties in Canada (Conservatives, Liberals, NDP, Green, Bloc Québécois and Forces et Démocratie). But is there any such organization that he overlooks? Go to the head of the class if you note the absence of the only political party in Canada that actually supports limited government, private property rights, legalization of victimless “crimes,” economic freedom and a non-interventionistic foreign policy. That is, of course, the Canadian Libertarian Party.

"Why this insulting oversight? Of course the main reason is that the powers that be (Maclean's, other major media) are not exactly in sympathy with the libertarian philosophy. But another cause is that high profile libertarians in Canada – and yes, yes, there are many – simply do not run for office on the Libertarian Party ticket. So I ask you, I plead with you, please contact the Canadian Libertarian Party and offer to run for Parliament in the next election....

"This insult, and insult it was, simply could not occur in the U.S. There, of course, the Libertarian Party is much stronger than in Canada, and cannot as easily be totally ignored. True, libertarianism in the U.S. has been fueled by the Ron Paul phenomenon.... There is no such phenomenon in Canada at present, unfortunately. But, there wasn’t always one in the U.S. either. It always has to start somewhere. If not right now, when is better?

"Running for office need not be an arduous task. A paper candidacy, where you do absolutely nothing but lend your name for this purpose, is better than leaving any ridings completely uncovered. Of course, the more you do in this regard the better for promoting liberty, and running for MP will give you a megaphone otherwise unavailable to you. Murray N. Rothbard, Mr. Libertarian, used to say that the average guy was mainly interested in beer, pizza and bowling (substitution for Canada: hockey) most of the time. But, whenever there was a national election, this man in the street could sometimes become interested in politics at least for a brief moment, and that we could best acquaint him with our philosophy on these occasions. No truer words were ever uttered.

"Of course, of course, politics is far from the only way to promote our beloved libertarian philosophy. There are many other roads to this end. But, the political system is surely one of them. Ron Paul, Ron Paul, Ron Paul. He has brought more people to our camp than any other person now living, and he did it all though the ballot box; I rest my case if anyone really doubts that political action, too, can promote liberty; hey, the first step, surely, is to announce that we’re here and not going away.

"There are some highly credentialed libertarians who believe voting, let alone running for office, is incompatible with our perspective. They are entirely wrong, if libertarianism is defined as adherence to the non-aggression principle (NAP). Is voting a per se violation of the NAP? Of course not. Is running for office and losing, necessarily an uninvited border crossing onto someone else’s person or property? Of course not. Is winning and actually taking office incompatible, if the MP becomes a Dr. No like Ron Paul and votes against every bill incompatible with our philosophy? It is really difficult to see how this can be the case.

"But, do we not give “sanction” to the state when we enter the dirty realm of politics? No more so than when we use a government road, its post office, carry its currency in our wallets, visit a public park or museum, go to a public school, etc. This applies even to those of us who eat food, wear clothing, live in housing, etc., since the omnipresent state is involved in all of those things. My book on Ron Paul is almost entirely devoted to making the case that politics and libertarianism, correctly understood, are not logically incompatible.

"So, please, Canadians, if you value liberty at all, seriously consider running for office on the Libertarian Party ticket."

Read more: https://www.dollarvigilante.com/blog/2015/05/21/open-letter-to-canadian-libertarians.html
'via Blog this'

Walter Block endorses Rand Paul for president

Mr. Libertarian Walter Block Endorses Rand Paul - Fergus Hodgson, The Canal, PanAm Post:

April 19, 2015 - "Whether he wanted it or not, US Senator Rand Paul (R-KY) now has the backing of one of libertarianism’s most strident and prominent academics as he campaigns for the presidency.

"Walter Block, the longtime anarcho-libertarian and Austrian-school economist, released a 1,400-word comment via Facebook this Saturday evening, entitled “The Libertarian Case for Rand Paul.”

"'I stand with Rand,' he wrote, 'and I urge my fellow libertarians, particularly those who have been most dismissive of him, to reconsider their position on this man.'

"Block, a tenured professor at Loyola University New Orleans, believes that his own 'libertarian credentials are about as good, among the living, as anyone else’s on the planet.' Lew Rockwell, founder and chairman of the Mises Institute, has dubbed him Mr. Libertarian, and commitment is not a matter of debate for the author of Defending the Undefendable (1976). Block’s uncompromising and combative style has earned him the sarcastic moniker of 'the moderate'.

"A long-time supporter of Rand’s father, Block also wrote Ron Paul for President in 2012, and he laments that 'The acorn has fallen too far from the tree in this case.' However, when it comes to electoral politics, Block is willing to acknowledge that “The perfect is the enemy of the good ...[and] It cannot be denied that Rand is pretty darned good from a libertarian point of view – compared with the realistic alternatives.'

"This announcement comes even after Rand Paul has distanced himself from Block. A 2014 New York Times article sought to sully the younger Paul with comments from Block taken out of context, and Rand countered that Block was just “some guy who I’ve never met."

"A final challenge to Rand among this potential voting block comes from former New Mexico Governor Gary Johnson, who ran on the Libertarian ticket in 2012.... Block acknowledges that Johnson is slightly more in line with libertarian ideology, but he has little interest in a third-party candidate.

Read more: http://blog.panampost.com/fergus-hodgson/2015/04/19/mr-libertarian-walter-block-endorses-rand-paul-for-president/
'via Blog this'