I'm keeping a catalogue of answers to the Dershofoxmanitz question, Why do we single out Israel amid the sea of man's inhumanity to man? Here's Julian Kossoff in the Telegraph, with another good answer: the cynosure answer, Israel/Palestine is at the center of the western historical/religious/intellectual crossroads right now in a way, alas, that the Congo is not.
In a recent Jewish Chronicle interview playwright David Hare discussed his latest Royal Court work, Wall, set on both sides of the security/separation barrier constructed by Israel to keep out terrorists but built, in parts, across tracts of the West Bank earmarked (in many a dust-gathering peace plan) as part of a future Palestinian homeland.
He was asked, Why Israel? and he replied: "Put it this way, I recognise it. It answers to something in me."
The [Chronicle] writer unfairly rubbished this as existential nonsense.
The fact that Hare's wife, Fashion designer Nicole Fahri, is Jewish, is good enough reason to spark his interest, while his education at Lancing College (with its glorious chapel) and Jesus College, Cambridge, would be another to explain the "something in him."
The playwright like hundreds of millions, is nominally Christian. When they listen to news of dramatic events taking place in Jerusalem, Nazareth and the Galilee (Bethlehem is now almost completely encircled by the Security Wall) it has an educational, cultural and religious resonance, in a way that dispatches from Kashmir, divided Cyprus or indeed the Western Sahara will never have.
That said, who wouldn't be interested? The story of Israel is a gripping epic; religion and ideology, nationalism and democracy, war and peace.
"The story of Israel is a gripping epic; religion and ideology, nationalism and democracy, war and peace."
I agree with everything but the last word. "War and more war" would be more like it.
Why single out Israel? Because it is headquarters to the only ideology that has a Fifth Column with a gun to the head of the only Superpower on earth, whose elite power centers and institutions are currently occupied by a two-party regime and its tentacles comprised of the most corrupt, unconscionable and evil collaboration to inhabit earth since the conspiracy of Pilate and Herod. That's why.
Why single out Israel?
Why not?
The question itself is outrageous. It suggests that Israel is justified in its persecution of Palestinians because everyone else is doing it.
Is it any wonder that Judt calls Israel "The Country that Wouldn't Grow Up"?
In other words, Israel and its sadomasochist Washington collaborators are a nest of vipers. Cut Israel, and you've cut off the head. Or cut Washington, and you’ve cut off Israel’s head.
Either way, humanity wins.
It's really obnoxious that Christians are assumed to have no investment in the Holy Land.
From Where and when did this assumption come?
As someone noted here in the comments not so long ago, when Freud came out against settling the Jews in Palestine, his first wise response was that adherents to the other monotheistic religions would never allow Jews to monopolize sites that are holy to them as well? And this was Freud, who regarded any religious devotion as simply repressed sexual drives. In effect, Freud, the elite atheistic purely ethnic Jew, had more respect for the other monotheist religions than practicing Jews today.
In answer to the question, why do we single out Israel amid the sea of man's inhumanity to man, there are three primary reasons for those of us who support America first.
1. We protect Israel in the UN, fund its war machine and (with private donations) its settlement operation, and enable it everywhere. Thus every time Israel pulls off another stunt like Gaza, the US gets blamed alongside Israel. This along, with our tendency to bomb everyone at the drop of a hat, is one reason why we have no more moral authority in the world.
2. Israel and its neo-conservative supporters are cajoling/goading us into a war with Iran, which will needlessly kill many Americans, drive oil to $250 a barrel, bankrupt us for a generation , destroy the retirements of tens of millions of citizens and leave us a second rate power.
3. Apologists for Israel demand our support on the grounds that Israel is "the only democracy in the Middle East" and that the Holocaust requires our support for "the Jewish state." But supporters don't seem to understand that democracy and the notion of the Jewish state are incompatible concepts. The fact that you can't say things like this in public and keep your career intact is turning us into a chickenshit nation
But,Madrid, Freud was also an enthusiastic member of B'nai Brith, and said so, emphatically. He was extremely proud of his Judaism, in the sense of, the fact of his being Jewish. In fact, this is a major key to his work (most of which, at the same time, I consider to be perfectly valid).
Why single out Israel? Why is Israel/Palestine different than the Congo? The most important difference is that the US is aiding and abetting in Israel's war crimes through its economic, military and diplomatic aid to Israel. That makes US citizens responsible for Israel's crimes whether they know it or not. This is not the case with the Congo as far as I know.
For me it's simple: I have personally have a lot more to do with what's happening in Israel than I do with any other place where man's inhumanity to man is being showcased. I'm Jewish, so there's a state there that supposedly speaks and acts on my behalf. I'm American, so more of my tax dollars are going there than to any other country. The biggest foreign threat to my safety is almost definitely the conflict between Islam and the West, and Israel ground zero for that conflict. My whole way of life depends on oil, the world supply of which is inextricably bound up with what happens in the Middle East. It's also a microcosm of so much that is wrong with the rest of the world that you can't help but thing that we have to solve Israel-Palestine first if we are to have any chance of solving other problems such as nationalism, religious extremism, militarism, neoconservativism, neoliberalism, etc. Other than that, who cares?
we single out israel because israel singles out itself.
Why single out Israel? Well, because our news and our governments do not (most western countries). Our governments often have sanctions or some other form of information, or restriction on places such as the Congo. As far as we are aware, they are not deliberately aiding death and destruction (though this is probably false), and stories can be found. The almost blanket exclusion of what is going on in the Occupied Territories, and it is going on in our names because our governments unconditionally support this terror, and in the case of the U.S. give aid and do not challenge the claim that Israel is "the only democracy in the middle east", mean that the truth is very much being kept from us, and we'd like to know why? And why should so much suffering be carried out in my name? (Refer back to the unconditional support and aid – the prime minister of Australia stated that support for Israel was in his DNA). That is why Israel needs to be singled out, because our governments and our mainstream media will not tackle, illuminate, or even alleviate the human rights abuses that are occurring in Palestine.
Israel is singled out because it is on the march for the land and the resources of the Middle East.
Like it's forebear: Germany, Israel is using the memory of an historical wrong to justify today's wars.
Like it's forebear: Germany, Israel prides itself in it's high-technology, and thinks God is mit uns (with us).
Israel is singled out because ordinary Americans (who don't have 51 Organizations and a war-mongering lobby in Washington) are sucking wind, while the good folks who brought us 911 and the Iraq War are pushing for the War on Iran. And they have 5100 Organizations and a war-mongering lobby in Washington sucking up the wealth of the country.
ONE of the reasons I single out Israel is because we are told not to single it out and instead focus on Congo. Well, something must be going on there. Why don't you want me to pay attention to it?
Speaking of (possible) sanctions: New government may face EU sanctions over two-state solution.
I would say that it is because the general mass brainwashing of western populations is still ultimately based on jewish memes, so if we ever want to free ourselves from this brainwashing, we have to untangle these memes, which are in any case producing ever-escalating, ever-more-barbaric effects on mass behaviour (and not just among Jews,either).
Answering a question is not the same as rationalizing an answer.
There are better questions to actually answer.
The first from the same set of concerns, is how can Palestinians lives be improved, objectively?
That answer cannot be "get back at Israel", as that to my mind KEEPS them in war, rather than in care.
The question, Richard Witty, is do oppressed and humiliated people have the right to resist their condition?
I don't believe that Israel is being singled out. Instead, I believe that Israel and Jewish issues are being forcefully shoved on Americans. With all of the propaganda aimed at them, I still don't think most Americans really care about Israel. Most people understand that Jewish issues are to be dealt with gingerly, but I doubt that many would voluntarily fund or fight for Israel.
Why single out Israel? Because Israel singles out itself for special treatment.
No other nation that so recently used mass terror to ethnically cleanse its indigenous population would get a free pass. No other nation that forced its aboriginal population into refugee camps would get a free pass. No other nation that started all but one of its many wars would get a free pass. No other nation with such a large nuclear arsenal would get a free pass.
The real question is why single out Israel for such favorable treatment that is denied to every other nation? Why give Israel a free pass when every other nation is called to account?
@ Witty "Answering a question is not the same as rationalizing an answer."
So, this is how Witty initially addresses Phil's question "Why single out Israel?" and the comment answers responding prior to his own. Hard not to conclude Witty views all the answers (Including Phil's offered answer) as merely
offering plausible or ostensibly creditable motives sans analysis of true, especially unconscious
motives.
Thus Witty's mind at work:
Don't answer Dershie et al's tactical debate question directly.
What is Witty's own answer? We don't know it; he doesn't it share substantively with us, not even a rationalization.
Instead he (1) attacks the other people's answers in context here as rationalizations by stating
a principle of human psychology bare of flesh other than the answers given by others. This
tactic can't help but suggest the others are not being truthful, are merely making up lists of excuses
due to lack of honesty or lack of self-consciousness. And (2) he substitutes his own question
as "a better one to actually answer." As if this was his blog. And he (now actually) answers his own invisible blog question and (3) tells any future responders any response viewed by him as rationalizing
a secret agenda to "get back at Israel" will not be accepted ipso facto.
only
And he takes the high ground with his substitutions by saying he is concerned with how to improve Pals' lives instead of trying to stick it to Israel, a recipe for endless war.
That's his response to the various listed answers. He doesn't bother to address any of them
directly because they are not worthy, the originators are all suspect, the messengers are
all defective, their messages not worth answering.
John challenges Witty's choice of which question is worthy to actually answer with one of his own. Ball in Witty's talmudic court.
Todd follows up, disagreeing with Dershie et al's assumption, the precipitating question of this thread Phil initially takes on. Ball again in Witty's court.
Let's see if Witty deems either John or Todd's answers worthy of an actual response…Or will we get more Witty dissembling?
Witty will give a non-response response.
Full of blah blah blah claptrap and the usual wind-baggery.
He'll lecture us on the virtues of serving in the IDF and how Israel wants peace but Palestinians have been rejecting peace in favor of terrorism.
Poor Israel. Poor residents of Southern Israel. Poor settlers who may be ethnically cleansed soon (never). Poor Jews. Remember the Holocaust!
I'm responding to Phil primarily.
My effort is to shift the emphasis of dissent from a reaction and anger orientation to a goal orientation.
It will serve dissent and it will serve humanity.
There is such a high risk of harming innocents by punitive thinking, speaking and acting, that I don't do it and don't suggest it.
"Goal orientation"? You are a pompous prick, Witty.
It is Israel which demands to be singled out — by impunity in the UN, by extraordinary levels of US political and military support from the US, by its special "mission" as High Priests of the Holocaust.
Actually, and objectively, Israel's Occupation and colonization in the Palestinian territories are international issues under the law and not just internal matters.
We can say, simply, that there are lots of bad actors in the world but they don't necessarily operate on our dime and with our protection. No one is suggesting that we should supply F16 fighter-bombers and Apache helicopters to Hamas or to murderous factions in Congo.
Goals are great. There are long term and short term goals. Long term my preference is to see real democracy in Palestine/Israel. Shorter term an end to occupation, subjugation and extreme violence. Shorter term than that and a necessary step toward the longer term goals: Increase power for the Palestinians vs the Israeli state. Negotiations make no sense between such unequal parties.
What Witty sees as punitive I may see as strategies. If the ends don't justify the means, what does? Witty has made a valid point in the past: the methods of resistance can effect the outcome. Specifically, violent transformation may make reconciliation difficult. Fair enough. If that is your concern, then work towards non violent change. But don't pretend that this is going to happen with more Israeli/Palestinian circus troupes or dialog.
I work towards boycotts and sanctions not for "punishment," but to raise awareness and acceptance of the idea that the Israeli state and zionism represent a dangerous apartheid society — awareness outside of Israel. But I can't dismiss violent resistance as irrational or simply punitive. Even ignoring the domestic pressures that select for increased local power to factions seen as "doing something", there are perfectly rational arguments for violent resistance that don't depend on an idea of punishment.
And Witty has yet to address the lists of reasons why Israel is "singled out" presented by many commentators. And he never will. This is very telling. He'd have to admit who has the actual power
to change things. Who needs to make the initial moves towards peace, healing. And who has greater right to claim victim status as between the Jews and the Palestinian Arabs.
It's a comfy position for a Jewish armchair warrior, protected by goy cops with a great moat, oceans, around him.
"The question, Richard Witty, is do oppressed and humiliated people have the right to resist their condition?"
Absolutely! The Palestinians are a case study in how terrorism and consistently finding ways to violate the road map are a recipe for success. They are thriving!
""Goal orientation"? You are a pompous prick, Witty."
A fine specimen of insulting someone the adult way.
May I suggest you stifle yourself with a plateful of haggis?
Richard is absolutely right. Whiners whine and revel in the misery.
Those who are equipped to make positive change examine the reality, ask good questions, and then start planning and doing.
"I work towards boycotts and sanctions not for "punishment," but to raise awareness and acceptance of the idea that the Israeli state and zionism represent a dangerous apartheid society"
What a loaded sentence! If Israel and [your definition of] Zionism represent an apartheid state…then one might conclude you are seeking much more than punishment…for example, annihilation of Israel.
One might get the sense that a functioning independent Palestinian state is not enough for you.
Suzanne, your positive ideas can be counted on the fingers of one foot.
I can't resist asking, though: why the sudden interest in, of all things, haggis??
Anyway, the point that needs to be made after every Witty peroration is The Jews treat Arabs like vermin. They shoot or otherwise maim and kill them at random, for no reason, all the time.
Suzanne: One might get the sense that a functioning independent Palestinian state is not enough for you.
It would certainly be an improvement on the current situation. It would likely be "enough for me" in the sense that that other issues would likely take precedence over that portion of my energy currently spent on anti-zionism — if it improved lives enough, resulted in fewer of my tax dollars supporting a racist state, made it less dangerous for me to travel to places I work, etc. But that's just my own motivation.
one might conclude you are seeking much more than punishment…for example, annihilation of Israel
I think annihilation is the wrong word. In exactly the same way the South African Nationalist-run government was "annihilated". I see any transformation to democracy being accomplished best if aided by Israeli civil institutions. As in South Africa: it will be tricky, not impossible. The degree to which transition is peaceful is largely in the hands of the most powerful party.
But people like you are not the target of my arguments. Unlike my liberal zionist friends, I don't worry that much about how arguments play with Israelis and American jews. That is a valid worry for some folks given their families, etc. And it certainly has a role to play as I'm focused on the rest of the US that doesn't already "have a horse in the race". The hard core racists like you will be on the other side all the way down, but adapt. And you'll grumble about the uppity Pals just like some of my unreconstructed south African acquaintances grumble about change.
One might get the sense . . .
I mean to say, it's unadulterated, exterminationist, colonialist, racist, perpetually ongoing, mass murder. Is that plain enough for you, Suzanne? Or shall I seek to make it even plainer, somehow?
Plus, also, inspired by this Jewish Nazi racist exterminationist genocidal ideology, the US kills Pakistanis like vermin from the air, with drones, on top of its ongoing random slaughter of Iraqis by any and every method it can think up.
oh yes,and Israel and/or the US interchangeably bomb random agglomerations of Sudanese, while the US randomly carpet-bombs Afghans. Any more I haven't got to yet?
Pulaski
It is rather presumptuous of you to assume that I'm racist, or religious, or 100% uncritical of Israel, just because I'm not anti-Israel.
But that is how krazy radical fringe types think. This gives them a justification to endorse or even finance violence against Israel.
BTW–you need to catch up with your buds. They are now endorsing a one state solution. I see it as nothing more than treading quicksand. But that's pretty much what you've accomplished in all this time anyway. :-)
Rowan–I WOULD ask why you don't take your whiny bawling arse out of the West since it is clearly so despicable to you.
But I DO realize that whining is your raison d'etre–and what you're whining about is secondary to that. So….never mind. :-)
That's your best response, Suzanne? Really? you're a truly contemptible human being, if indeed that's what you are.
I knew that was what you needed, though – a jolly good fisk.
“I will bless those who bless me and curse those who curse me.”
What part of truth don’t you understand?