May You Live in Interesting Times
I’ll come out and say it: fear for your security from a persecuted minority group is bullshit. Anyone who hasn’t lived in India or South Africa or the Antebellum South or Nazi Germany can just rent a copy of District 9. I think you’ll get the point pretty quickly.
Does that mean that persecuted minority groups don’t act out? Um… what do you want them to do, exactly? We build aggressively on their land; we withhold their duly paid taxes; we actually argue in public that they don’t exist, and oppose their efforts to build a separate, democratic country. We subscribe to the doctrine of collective responsibility, blaming Palestinians who grew up in exile for an invasion from an entirely separate set of brown people in 1948. And we deny, to this very day, that we even gently encouraged people who had lived for generations, in what is now Israeli land, to leave. As if we became a majority overnight, by magic.
I needed to go to this conference to be shaken out of my complacency; I thought this was an issue of religion. I really did. At times, I vocally supported a one-secular-state solution, as I am first and foremost an American, and I believe that mixing government and religion causes trouble ten times out of ten.
But if you are a liberal, modern Jew, you have to confront two realities. One is that the State of Israel is a fundamentally well-intentioned thing which has done much good. The second is that it is a modern, blindingly obvious imperial power with a particular interest in its next-door neighbor, a la Ireland under England. The question of who got there first is irrelevant. The question of who attacked whom first is irrelevant. The question of who is “more civilized” – again, irrelevant.
This formula for a Host State and a Dependent State ONLY WORKS if you consider the residents of the dependent state sub-human. And we Jews know a thing or two about being considered sub-human.
Now, nobody in their right mind could say that this delegitimizes Israel itself. Was England done for (or less legitimate) after it lost America, or for that matter Ireland, India, Pakistan? Was France no longer a global power for losing Algeria? Did America matter less to the world after turning Japan back over to the Japanese, even after the Japanese perpetrated a mass act of terror against us and were repaid with two nuclear bombs?
No. Rather, these countries all GAINED prestige from losing colonies, if they temporarily lost some income. Colonies are profitable. They enable a parasitic relationship between a host country and a subservient people. It doesn’t matter what the laws on the books say, or what agreements were signed when, or what, or what, or what. The Palestinians are restricted in freedom of movement. Their economy is skimmed and sanctioned by Israel, with no real representation to show for it. And all attempts at breaking free are thwarted.
I am practically glowing to see the Palestinians turning en masse to civil disobedience. It works a lot better than freedom fighting, and it may signify the end is near – IF the Palestinians get the support they need, from without and from within. Nelson Mandela started out bombing buildings, and wound up toppling a racist regime through popular civil disobedience. John Brown raided an armory and helped instigate a Civil War; a hundred years later, Martin Luther King Jr. put people in public squares and lunch counters and buses and had them just stand there, being human beings, unwilling to move. And he accomplished what John Brown set out to accomplish with gunpowder.
If the Palestinians undertake mass civil disobedience now, we know what the government of Israel will say. It will cite security concerns, and it will say the protesters are disrupting the public order. It will lock them up and beat some of them, and the few instances where loose cannons fight back will be held up by the media as a foil for every Palestinian.
But then, the disobedience will continue. The public sympathy will start to turn; the courts will intervene when it is relatively safe to do so. And sooner or later, after much tragedy, there will be a free and independent Palestine. It will exist side-by-side with a free and independent Israel, and both Israel and the United States will benefit from the increased security this brings to the Middle East and to world Jewry and world Islam.
When I was 14, I was worried that my life would be boring. Bill Clinton was my President, the economy was roaring along, and Yitzhak Rabin even seemed to be making the impossible happen in Israel / Palestine. I was worried how I would fill the interceding years, now that there were no more great crusades.
Be bored no longer, my Jewish brothers and sisters in America. We have something big to fight for. And if we do, we stand a chance to prove that Jews can be on the right side of history not only when we don’t have power, but when we do. Doing the right thing when you have power is the rarest of all things. And it sets us apart in the way we should be – not only in having the right morals on paper, as we know we do; but in letting them guide our actions, as individuals and as a people.
It’s time to exercise some Jewish morality. It’s time to let a people go.
Hi Josh, I may respond to some of your other points when I have a chance, but for now, I’ll just stick to your first paragraph. You see the Palestinians as a persecuted minority group and therefore Jewish Israeli’s have no right to be afraid for their security. The horrors of the second intifada are still to fresh for me to accept that I have no right to expect my govern,ent to be cautious when dealing with my children’s lives. If you say that the behavior of the second intifada is to be expected, than you have a far lower expectations of the Palestinians of people as I do. Because I do NOT see them as sub-human I can never justify the way they behave as a society when they celebrate or justify murder of Israeli citizens.
I’m also glad you mentioned Nazi Germany. I do not remember Jews indiscriminately killing German citizens, and I do not know of any Israeli Concentration Camps or mainstream propoganda that refers to the Palestinians as sub-humans. Sure there are a few nut jobs but they are ignored by everyone including the vast majority of the Israeli right.
Jonathan, thanks for your comments, as always. I would never presume to invalidate your fear for your safety as an individual – but that’s exactly my point. The way things are set up, everybody is afraid.
We need to end the fear. I’m sure British people in the States in 1776 had very legitimatimate fear for their safety. But that’s not really the broader concern.
There were Jews who fought back against the Germans: see, e.g., the Warsaw Uprising. But the Jews were not being colonized. They were being exterminated. So they had substantially less chance to fight back. Had they fought back effectively, I’m sure we wouldn’t chastise them today.
I get that you consider Palestinians human, and I appreciate that. But I’m not sure you’ve tried to see the past sixty-five years from their perspective. Fighting back isn’t really a decision. It’s just what you do if you have the power to do so.
If Jews had killed German children during the Holocaust, I like to think I would be highly ashamed of such behavior, and I certainly wouldn’t idealize such Jews by naming schools, camps, or public squares after them.
@Josh
Those comments were made by Avraham.
At times, I vocally supported a one-secular-state solution
For me, the most interesting part of the J Street Conference was Ehud Olmert’s speech, when he declared his belief that what he offered Abu Mazen in 2008 will ultimately become the agreement.
Along, those lines, Peter Beinert, in last Friday’s Ha’aretz, made a reference to the ultimate agreement being based on the Clinton Parameters.
There’s a problem with such thinking: If Olmert’s 2008 ideas are the basis for an acceptable agreement then they would have led to an agreement.
If the Clinton Parameters were the basis then they too would have led to an agreement.
We can argue about this or that politician or this or that stroke of bad timing, but if it looks like a duck, walks like a duck . . .
. . we’re all stuck in this big mess, and there is no petition framework that will be acceptable to both sides. None.
We have to tell ourselves the truth: This movement of Zionism has failed, and we should try to develop one, bi-national state.
“partition”
Heh heh. Sorry, didn’t mean to confuse you guys. That’s embarrassing. 🙂
Jonathan, we can talk about what way is forward, but the way we have now is not working, and the status quo is overwhelming. My sympathies are with binationalism (or, rather, secularism), but my feeling now is that what the Palestinians need are the freedom and equality offered by statehood. And Israel needs imperialism off its conscience.
Avraham, while I agree, it is, as you say, “only a few nut jobs” who have actually attacked and killed children.
Indians idolize a man named Subhash Chandra Bose, and refer to him as “Netaji” (respected leader). He was a freedom fighter who fought back against the British, who dealt in a terrifying way with Indian dissidents.
Unlike Gandhi, Netaji believed that Indians would gain respect only through arming themselves and fighting. In a strategic calculation, he approached Adolf Hitler with a plan for the Nazis to help invade India.
This has been hard to swallow for me, but my girlfriend is from West Bengal, Netaji’s homeland. There is nothing I can do to reduce his importance to the cause of India’s liberation.
Just as I will always feel a pain whenever I see a Svastika hanging in an Indian household (a symbol which was stolen from India after thousands of years of use and which is still not acceptable in public in the West), so I will never give full attention or respect to a man who approached Adolf Hitler. But liberations are messy, and only someone with no memory could demand moral perfection from a subjugated people.
Drawing analogies between Israel and British or French colonialism seems silly. Americans, Indians and Algerians never threatened to wipe the British or French homelands from the map. So those analogies only work if you honestly believe that giving up on the idea of a Jewish homeland in the land of Israel would be okay.
I think the Palestinian status quo is horrendous and fully agree with you that Israel has a moral obligation to take some risks to make it better. But I am very, very torn over how big those risks can and should be. Self-amputating at the neck isn’t a very good way to wash blood off your hands.
South Africa and Northern Island provide more illustrative models than Algeria or India. But neither the black South Africans nor the Irish catholics had powerful third party nations like Iran chomping at the bit to help them annihilate their occupiers. And both were resolved by massive reconciliation efforts involving resistance leaderships who renounced violence and terror. Fatah took some difficult and admirable steps down that path in the 90s, but continues to foment and incite hatred against Israel and Jews in general today. And we won’t get into Hamas (yes, I know Hamas probably wouldn’t exist if not for the occupation, but it does exist, and Israel has to deal with it).
You say “only someone with no memory could demand moral perfection from a subjugated people,” and you’re right. I don’t expect Palestinians to love Israelis as their neighbors or even to trust Israelis not to screw them over. And like I said, I think Israel has a moral obligation to take some risks to make things better for the subjugated people.
But no matter how obligated I feel to help someone, if he has a gun pointed at me and keeps telling everyone who will listen over and over that he’s going to kill me the first chance he gets, the first step I take to help him is NOT going to be to take off my flak jacket.
Themicah, that’s very well-argued, and I appreciate your contribution. But I just saw some Palestinians speak, and I’m very sure they weren’t pointing a gun at my head. Also, I have every confidence in Israel to survive a globally-supported, carefully-orchestrated partition. It’s survived much worse.
But I just saw some Palestinians speak, and I’m very sure they weren’t pointing a gun at my head.
@Josh
We all are enjoying your postings, and you seem like a great guy.
I’d like to offer some advice: You might read a bit more about the events the occurred between July 2000-July 2005, and perhaps consider a bit more what that era did to the mindset of Israelis (whoever was at fault, consider how those days appeared to Israelis, and what that translated into regarding how Israelis view Palestinian society.)
Jonathan,
Thank you, and noted. I have one more post to fulfill my obligation to JewSchool for the JStreet conference, so maybe I’ll address that issue! It’s been a pleasure hearing from you all, and thanks for your civility as well! I know these issues cut close to the bone.
One is that the State of Israel is a fundamentally well-intentioned thing which has done much good. The second is that it is a modern, blindingly obvious imperial power with a particular interest in its next-door neighbor, a la Ireland under England.
Not…quite….getting how these two sentences fit together.
Miri,
Hehe. The attempt was to make it clear that Israel is, in my opinion, a very particularly flawed thing of beauty. Like England or the US, we can see it as a great force for good, which nonetheless is culpable of a grave humanitarian error which it must fix right away.
Hope that helped!
Sorry to be stuck on this point, while you are right that there are only a few nut jobs who kill Israeli civilians, they are supported, celebrated, and idealized by mainstream Palestinain society. Palestinian media is saturated with anti-semitism and incitement to violence. Such moral depravity is just not justified by occupation.
@Avraham: Don’t know if you ever watch channel 2 news. Several weeks ago they posted an interview with settlers. Young settlers. Lovely girls, boys, in their teens. They spoke about establishing a theocracy for the state of Israel (If Netanyahu doesn’t corral these groups instead of supporting them, things are going to go embarrassingly bad for him), many of them clearly saw Palestinians as subhuman, and frnakly, the groups that are settling hilltops and living in outposts – they are not fringey nut jobs. They are fairly mainstream nut jobs. They exist and grow because the Israeli government supports them in doing so, and has, for decades.
I”m glad you all have takenthe time to be civil with Josh, but whether he’s an expert historian or not, he’s not wrong; actually, he’s gotten it just about right. There is no future for Israel if we do not pull back from the green line and create an independent state for Palestinians. If we do not, there will be two possible outcomes: Israel will not be Jewish. The second is Israel will not be a democracy. The tide of which way that’s going now is pretty clear, but neither of those options is acceptable to me. The status quo -which is what Bibi and many Israelis think can go on indefinitely- cannot. So our choice is stark: not Jewish or not a democracy.
Or we could have two states for two peoples. Take your pick, those are the three available choices… but if we wait too long, we’ll be stuck with only the first two, as the settlers chip away at the possibility of two states.
Civil disobedience works a lot better than freedom fighting? Evidence for this? I find these kinds of statements from Israelis and Americans–the political heirs of Ben Gurion and George Washington, both of whom clearly fall in the “freedom fighter” camp–particularly hilarious, in a “makes you despair of humanity” way.
William, before I’ll permit myself to be used as an example of despair at humanity, I’ll need from you a contemporary example, paralleling israel / Palestine, of independence gained by force. 😉 I’ll also need an example of where civil disobedience, carried out over the long term, failed.
KRG – I’m not sure what makes you think that these teenagers on channel 2 are mainstream. I live over the green line, and follow right-wing blogs and op-eds,and I do not hear people referring to Palestinians as sub-human.
You are operating under the premise that it is within Israel’s capability to achieve peace a peaceful solution of two states for two peoples. Last I checked Mahmoud Abbas and just about every other Palestinian leader has refused to say that he will ever accept Israel as a Jewish State. The Palestinian idea of a two state solution seems to be One Palestinian state (which judging by the way things are run now, will probaly NOT be very Democratic) and one “other” state where all of the Palestinian refugees will hopefully go to.
Between 10-35% of American soldiers on tours of deployment in Iraq came home with PTSD. Israelis and Palestinians have been at war – or at least a mindset of war, exposed to random violence or the threat thereof – for decades.
Those settler kids KRG talks about have, from the time they were born, been subjected to unremitting hostility. Their families are shot and stoned on the roads, slaughtered in their beds, relentlessly attacked and libeled in the media… Embrace some context. We have school shootings in America over high-school bullying. Yet, not a single settler kid has picked up a gun and gone on a rampage. Not a single one. A few dozen of them are camping out on hilltops, separating themselves from the community and retreating into ideology as a crutch for healing. So f*cking what, buy yourself a heart you prick.
The situation for Palestinian kids in refugee camps is atrocious. I don’t think anyone can watch the Jenin Theater video without feeling compassion for the life, or what passes for a life, that these people are enduring. I don’t know how we can expect Palestinians to grow up to be rational actors when they’ve suffered that much loss, that much… pain.
A few days ago, Teju Cole wrote something about the White Savior Industrial Complex. It was a flawed but fantastic piece of thought, with many parallels to Israel-Palestine advocacy, and I suggest everyone read it. To paraphrase, the world is not a problem to be solved with boundless white enthusiasm.
Josh, you seem like an honest, well-meaning guy, but this article of yours is total horsesh*t. This conflict is not about you, and you’re not going to help those involved to deal with their trauma and resolve their differences by projecting on to them your privilege and fantasy. It sounds banal, I know. You’re all excited to save the world and here I am, smacking you down. That’s very much not what they taught us in our safe, privileged suburban high schools. We were to be the generation of messiahs. Well, it turns out we’re not messiahs, riding off into the sunset to meet our universal humanist destiny. All that is bullshit. At most, at the very most, what you and I and we can do is give people our support and help them heal. And maybe, just maybe, very very slowly, because healing takes time, they – the nameless, faceless, frightened and angry people who have to live together when you declare victory and go back home – will find the strength to coexist.
@Victor
Where have you been?
Violence succeeding? Eritrea vis a vis Ethiopia. Nonviolence failing? Tibet vis a vis China.
Avraham, I think you’ll want to check again on Mahmoud Abbas. From what I’ve heard and seen, he absolutely supports a free and democratic Jewish state. The former Prime Minister of Israel, Ehud Olmert, told me as much the day before yesterday, in public, with the cameras rolling. I’m inclined to believe he has decent intel.
Victor, while I will respectfully disagree with you on the intrinsic value of diaspora Jews contributing to the conversation, I will ask for your apology for belittling my motives. As it happens, you know nothing about me or my background. I have been an organizer for ten years, and I have advocated for plenty of things in which I was not a direct player. I don’t understand how you think a democracy can survive otherwise, and again, I resent your extremely cartoonish characterization of me.
Hey Jonathan, I hope you’re doing well. I’m in med school, kinda busy. I barely write anymore (pretty active on twitter – @victorshikhman) but I’m still doing some settlement advocacy in my spare time, because someone needs to. There’s remarkable work being done there; I just hope it’s not coming too late.
Josh… I don’t see how an apology solves anything; it is a cartoonish request. I characterized what you wrote, not who you are. Yes, it’s true, I don’t know everything there is to know about you, but I don’t need to. This shouldn’t be a battle of personalities, an outlet for ego, but a meeting place of ideas. Your intentions in this piece are transparent. It doesn’t make you a bad or an ill-intentioned person, but it is what it is. And saying you’ve “advocated for plenty of things in which I was not a direct player” only feeds into the caricature of the White Savior complex Teju Cole rips to shreds here.
Yes, KFJ, yes, yes, it is abominable rhetoric. How dare I, and to such a wonderful person, as Josh no doubt is. Unconscionable. I’ll volunteer to ban myself for a while. See y’all… June-ish?
Josh, Google “Abbas Jewish State” The top searches are articles citing direct qutes from Abbas rejecting a Jewish State and olmert saying he really accepts it. If Palestinian leadership can’t say it publicly I’m not sure how much it’s worth.
@Josh (and anybody else)
Please read, from today’s Ha’aretz:
http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/strenger-than-fiction/open-letter-to-peter-beinart-boycotting-the-settlements-will-not-save-the-two-state-solution-1.421302
Avoid stereotypes whenever possible!
http://arouda.blogspot.com/2012/03/stuff-jewish-mothers-dont-like.html
Avraham — You can watch former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s loud and vociferous rejection of the assertion “Abbas is not a partner for peace”. Video from J Street conference.
I in particular detest the man’s Lebanon and Gaza offensives, not to say anything about his corruption. But he absolutely refutes this nonsense about no partner for peace, demanding recognition of Israel’s Jewish character, and not dividing Jerusalem.
“Recognizing Israel as a Jewish state” is something Netanyahu invented to forestall the peace process. It’s never been an issue until the last administration and the PLO already recognized Israel’s right to exist. It’s a load of bullshit and I’m shamed that anybody takes it seriously.
At the very very least, it’s something that should be agreed MUTUALLY and IN NEGOTIATIONS, not as a precondition. (Which Netanyahu supposedly says he has none. Which is bullshit itself.)
You can watch former Prime Minister Ehud Olmert’s loud and vociferous rejection of the assertion “Abbas is not a partner for peace”. Video from J Street conference.
Ironically, Olmert did confirm the assertion that Abbas is not a partner for a 2-state-agreement.
By Olmert’s admission, Olmert is also not a partner for a 2-state agreement.
1. Olmert claims that he (Israel) was ready for an agreement in 2008.
2. Olmert also claims that Abbas (Palestine) was ready for an agreement in 2008.
3. Olmert claims that the deal discussed in 2008 was what the two sides will end up agreeing to.
Well, Houston, we’ve got a problem, because if the idea is an agreement between Israel and Palestine, and Israel and Palestine both wanted an agreement, and the agreement was right there in front of them . . . . .
There won’t be a 2-state agreement.
Victor, this isn’t about ego. If you believe that no one should ever advocate for anyone besides themselves, then I’m afraid I don’t really count you among the people who are worth arguing with. Simple math should show you that disaffected groups are not generally their own best advocates. They lack money, time and a platform. By arguing against “white whateveritisyou’retalkingabout,” you rule out the idea of any disaffected person having a powerful friend, because somehow that would be “bullshit.”
This is an insidious and evil argument, which cannot POSSIBLY do anything other than make disaffected people more disaffected. I don’t respect you for holding it, no matter whether or not you can find some far-flung academic to agree with you. We fundamentally differ here, and I am actually shocked at your point of view, which doesn’t happen often. I’m glad you’re so convinced that you’re right, but I am so diametrically opposed to your point of view that I’m simply going to ignore you from here on out.
Jonathan and Avraham, I appreciate the sources, and I think this goes back to my argument from my first piece that anyone can quote anything to back them up in this conflict. I don’t think it’s possible to find a contemporary, international, respected, on-the-record source who states that Mahmoud Abbas is opposed to Israel on any level, except in that he’s opposed to its current policies. And in that, frankly, he’s doing his job.
Jonathan, out of curiosity… if you think the failure of certain past negotiations dooms the future of any two-state solution to failure, what do you think WILL happen (or what would you like to see happen)?
@Josh
I invite to re-read the Ha’aretz piece above. IMHO,that is the closest reflection to how “mainstream” Israelis view the conflict. I don’t think that’s providing any factual sources.
And, I don’t think that the failure of past negotiations dooms the future of a 2-state solution. IMO, the failure of past negotiations illustrates that there isn’t a formula acceptable to both sides.
Put it another way, Olmert argues that the acceptable formula indeed was presented in the fall of 2008. So, why didn’t Olmert and Abbas make a deal based on that formula? This isn’t brain surgery. What’s the mystery partition formula.
what do you think WILL happen (or what would you like to see happen)?
Nothing will happen. Look at the history of the past 4 decades.
As I’ve written to you before, though, I’ve thrown up my hands and said that Zionism in this carnation has failed, so we should try to create one, bi-national state.
“I invite you.”
If anyone can quote anything to back them up in this conflict, then you should have no problem quoting an authoritative palestinain leader publicly accepting or showing willingness to accept Israel as a Jewish State. Personally, I have not been able to locate such a source.
@Josh (or anybody else)
IMO, Carlo Strenger really has his finger on the pulse of Israel 2012.
http://www.haaretz.com/blogs/strenger-than-fiction/this-passover-jewish-liberals-must-liberate-themselves-from-self-righteous-utopianism-1.422581
“We had three main arguments for a quick implementation of the two-state solution.
The first was that time is against Israel: The longer we wait, the lower the chances for a moderate Palestinian leadership that will go for the two-state solution.
Our second argument was that unless the two-state solution was implemented, the greater land of Israel would become either a bi-national state or an apartheid regime.
Our third argument was that the occupation is immoral. We pounded on this incontrovertible fact again and again
Israel’s electorate didn’t buy any of the three arguments.
To the first it replied: If the situation is so fragile, we won’t take the risk of closing a deal with a moderate leadership, and then get Hamas at the 1967 borders.
The second question was bypassed by an intermediary position brilliantly analyzed by Noam Sheizaf: If you look at the situation calmly, it is clear that Israel’s current interest is to maintain the status quo. Annexing the West Bank would lead to international problems; retreating to the 1967 borders is too risky. Ergo, the status quo of the occupation is the rational choice by default.
It was our moralistic stance that backfired the most. The left became a hated minority, and it is easy to explain psychologically why. Abraham Maslow, one of the founders of humanistic psychology, once argued that human needs are organized in a pyramid: First we take care of food, shelter and safety; after that we want to belong to a group; then we want to achieve status in this group; and only then we care about self-actualization and strive for lofty ideals.”
Before we set about saving Israelis from themselves (from our fortified position in the Park Slope bunker) we might want to give Strenger’s ideas some consideration.
The time is unfortunately coming when this will all be a purely academic subject for the amusement of historians to debate the might-have-beens for the state of Israel. It boils down to a simple proposition really: If you want peace, work for justice. Resistance to that simple truth is always ultimately futile.
It boils down to a simple proposition really: If you want peace, work for justice.
Ironically, the world is not a very simple place.
@DSG
Can you name one group involved in this conflict that does not want peace?
The world is a more simple place than political rhetoricians would like, and imperialism under any flag is always a very simple proposition; once stripped of its hatred and resentment.
Indeed, that very simplicity is demonstrated by how nicely and simply Jonathan’s query has brought us back to the beginning of the discussion. Remember we started with the simple truth:
“I’ll come out and say it: fear for your security from a persecuted minority group is bullshit.”
One would be hard pressed to improve on that formulation or on the simple ideas that “persecuted minority groups” will “act out” in response to arguments: “… that they don’t exist, and oppose their efforts to build a separate, democratic country. We subscribe to the doctrine of collective responsibility, blaming Palestinians who grew up in exile for an invasion from an entirely separate set of brown people in 1948. And we deny, to this very day, that we even gently encouraged people who had lived for generations, in what is now Israeli land, to leave. As if we became a majority overnight, by magic.”
It’s undeniably simple unfortunately, and political rhetoric and Zionist baiting questions won’t work to turn the tables of debate for much longer before history has its inevitable and definitive say. That would be too bad, but it’s never too late to work for justice.
@Dean
Can you name one group involved in this conflict that does not want peace?
And we deny, to this very day, that we even gently encouraged people who had lived for generations, in what is now Israeli land, to leave. As if we became a majority overnight, by magic.”
And this is why Josh needs to be more responsible in his writings.
Who exactly denies, to this very day, that the Jews even gently encouraged people who had lived for generations, in what is now Israeli land, to leave?
I’ll come out and say it: fear for your security from a persecuted minority group is bullshit
I guess. I guess having you’re face blown off by a suicide bomber shouldn’t bother you if that bomber comes from a persecuted minority group. If you have your face blown off by a bomber from a strong society, fine, that’s cause for pain and fear . . . . but a suicide bomber from a persecuted minority group? bullshit!
“I guess having you’re face blown off by a suicide bomber shouldn’t bother you if that bomber comes from a persecuted minority group.”
And I guess the argument can be made from that approach that you can keep persecuting them until they cease “acting out?” And, like water circling a drain, takes us back to the solid premises beginning this discussion yet again?
Notice the microcosm study we’re seeing here: Historically, sometimes slowly but always surely, you find yourself speaking such arguments to yourself, usually in some measure of anger; while history witnesses and documents your self-inflicted demise. In contrast, openness to the possibility for justice — for doing the right thing and overcoming injustice and persecution for all involved parties — has worked to the advancement of every society that ever tried it.
So, @ Jonathon1: Can you name one group “involved in this conflict” that resists working for justice for all?
Caution: The array of simple Zionist answers available will only circle us back in this discussion yet again; to the simple truth of:
“But if you are a liberal, modern Jew, you have to confront two realities. One is that the State of Israel is a fundamentally well-intentioned thing which has done much good. The second is that it is a modern, blindingly obvious imperial power with a particular interest in its next-door neighbor, a la Ireland under England. The question of who got there first is irrelevant. The question of who attacked whom first is irrelevant. The question of who is “more civilized” – again, irrelevant.”
@Dean
And I guess the argument can be made from that approach that you can keep persecuting them until they cease “acting out?”
For sure you can make that argument from that approach.
You can also make the argument that Israelis are justified in fearing Palestinian society. (Perhaps I am a coward, for I do fear having my body maimed.)
Or, we can just say that fear for your security from a persecuted minority group is bullshit
So, @ Jonathon1: Can you name one group “involved in this conflict” that resists working for justice for all?
Every Zionist political party/movement, Fatah, and Hamas–they all resist working for justice for all (which is not always the same as justice.)
@Dean
Can you name one group “involved in this conflict” that does not want peace?
I’m not sure why it’s so important to you not to answer this question, btw.
Again, it’s really an issue with Josh Hyman writing irresponsible things like And we deny, to this very day, that we even gently encouraged people who had lived for generations, in what is now Israeli land, to leave. As if we became a majority overnight, by magic.
Does he think we are living in 1978? Where is he getting this from?
If anything, he should at least mention Sari Nusseibeh, who is the only Palestinian leader/academic who will admit that a Jewish Temple even stood in Jerusalem. (Not that really matters so much but, again, Josh Hyman started this by making up things about Israeli society, and by saying that Israelis shouldn’t fear having their lives ended by suicide bombers.)
Notice the microcosm study we’re seeing here: Historically, sometimes slowly but always surely, you find yourself speaking such arguments to yourself, usually in some measure of anger; while history witnesses and documents your self-inflicted demise. In contrast, openness to the possibility for justice — for doing the right thing and overcoming injustice and persecution for all involved parties — has worked to the advancement of every society that ever tried it.
@Dean
I am prepared to take on valiantly any and all comers on these issues. I shall not allow myself to degenerate into a cliche!
Worry not. The mythology of a weak People of benign visionaries fighting for survival in a hostile land against a persecuted minority needs cliches in support its ongoing manufacture of history and identity. Indeed, an ideology of hate and colonialism must always live and breath such ready-made rhetoric in order to survive. Some of us might not see victimizing the Palestinians and attempting to denigrate and obliterate Arab culture and civilization as “valiant,” but all would agree it is an effort needing folks who are well armed with the traditional weapons.
BTW: Removal of those myths is the first step toward peace and reconciliation, and history has already recorded the start of that process. Thus, your oft-repeated question about desire for peace was of course answered in the first sentence of Mr. Hyman’s fine essay. . . That is, if you are asking about a genuine desire for peace. If not, one can only wish you the best of luck as you soldier on. As the rest of us watch the post-Zionist discourse that is already well underway, many of us will hope for an honest reexamination of American-Islamic-Jewish relations before the increasing international hostility toward Israel writes the history. Apart from what else is said about it, Israel is a state and ultimately history must hold her to the same standard as other states. The real question posited here has only been whether sooner might be better than later.
Mr. Hyman’s fine essay
I must disagree. Mr. Hyman’s essay is terrible. It’s terrible because he is making up things about Israeli society, and he is claiming that people should not fear having their heads blown off by bombs, as long as those bombs are delivered by a persecuted minority.
@Dean
As for your other comments: Ok, you have the right to express your opinion. Obviously your comments aren’t directed at my comments. Fair enough.
Sounds very nice, when I got to the bottom I saw “two state solution” there. According to people who are ACTUALLY THERE though, this is impossible. Israel has been busy making a two-state solution physically impossible. There apparently isn’t even one street there without both “countries” on it. How can that be done? What have you done, Israel? What have you made now? It’s like they’re a truant teenager who’s booby trapped himself right in and there’s no way to dig him out without the thing exploding. Right? What the hell have you done Israel….