If you assume, as I do, that it is important to convert Jews to being critics of Israel, because Jews have more power over policymaking than anybody else, the question becomes, How do you do so? How do you convey to Jews what Israel has become?
Don’t ask me. I’ve failed at this task again and again. I’m more emotional than logical, my Zionist friends are all angry at me, and the other night I got into an argument with Marion Dreyfus at a party. I heard my voice rising, a sure sign that I was getting nowhere.
Here is one answer, Hazel Kahan’s report on Susan Nathan, author of The Other Side of Israel, which documents the second-class citizenship of fully 20 percent of the Israeli population (a much larger percentage, I would note, than blacks in the United States before the civil rights movement). Nathan has lived among Israeli Palestinians for years, and she advocates a thoughtful method of breaking through to Jews about the reality of life in Israel.
Since the publication of her book, Ms. Nathan has spoken at numerous events in Europe, where she reports that awareness and information levels among Europeans have increased considerably and continue to grow. At the same time, her energetic public presence have transformed how she sees her role as an activist:
There’s a huge division now coming between Jews who’ve understood the reality of Israel and what’s going on here and those who’ve yet to understand the reality of what’s going on here, who can’t accept it and find it very frightening and threatening. My role is not to continue to bash away at Israel how terrible Israel is…it’s very important I’ve realized by being in Europe to show compassion towards Jews who are not yet able to accept that this country has turned out to be the way it is; it’s very frightening actually to see Israel the way that it really is. My own position has started to evolve to understand you can’t frighten people into accepting the reality here…It’s important to acknowledge and understand that I was once in their position…I was very much the victim of the Zionist education which hundreds of thousands of people around the world…but the Zionist position is weakening…
Instead of the ‘barrage’ that characterized her earlier public presentations, Susan now prefers ‘fierce criticism of our people mixed with compassion’:
I’ve changed how I present (my argument): I’m far less aggressive but at the same time I’m far more dangerous…I have a far better view of what’s going on..that’s the only way you can get Jews to take on board what’s happening here…a continuous barrage of criticism will not make the changes we need. I’m very fiercely critical but I’m also very compassionate. It’s very difficult for people to accept that everything they’ve based their life on has been based on a sandcastle which is now being swept away by a wave.
Susan’s more right than you or Norman.
I get a feeling you’re saying that with a hint of glee.
However, I agree. A barrage of criticism reinforces a siege mentality.
She’s much more right than you, Richard. I would encourage anyone who hasn’t read it yet to read her book. For you Richard, I would suggest a studied reading of her chapter entitled “The Missing Left”.
I read her book a year or two ago. It’s very good. Her approach here sounds right.
An element of the failing of an “emotional” approach, is that much of your commentary is snarky, more than even just sarcasm or parody.
Who will listen to someone that they perceive hates them?
Even if they speak important perspectives.
Phil and Norman are more right than you Richard, to parody your snaky comment above.
Another dilemma for you is that you have an audience that you derive some benefit from (maybe not so much financial, but some emotional fame), that you would risk if you infused all of your criticism with sincere love of your opponent.
Many of your audience is seeking Jews’ fear, as the criteria of “justice”.
So, desiring that Israel transform is not a satisfactory outcome. For much of your audience, Israel must suffer.
You speak for yourself, Richard, not for this blog’s audience.
But nonetheless a cool–though transparent–rhetorical device.
“For much of your audience, Israel must suffer. ”
Don’t confuse accountability with suffering. Israel must be held accoutable. For you accountability is an undesirable concept that must be avoided at all costs.
As for who’s audince is seeking Jews’ fear, that would have to go down and the mother of all “pot calling the kettle black” statements. Israel has always exploited Jewish fear, both inside Israel and elsewhere. Fear of persecution. Fear of reprisals. Fear of estrangement and isolation should they not tow the party line.
Well spoken reply, Shingo.
@ Shingo August 16, 2009 at 5:40 pm
Israel has always exploited Jewish fear, both inside Israel and elsewhere.
I think it is more accurate to say that pro-colonization Zionists both in Israel and America “[have] exploited Jewish fear, both inside Israel and elsewhere”. Many Israelis, as well as Americans, are being played by extremists.
edit for Colin Murray August 16, 2009 at 9:21 pm:
Curse the lack of an edit capability. My last sentence got lost in a cut-and-paste.
Frightened and angry people have very poor judgment.
We must all say enough to the special pleading of the Jews. 60 years of compassion has made them ever more monstrous. From now on we treat them just like everyone else, no matter how special and entitled they believe themselves to be.
We must all put a stop to generalising individuals as “the Jews”, “the Arabs”, or “the *whatever*”. Until then, we are bound to continue facilitating the monstrosity of treating some people as entitled to more than others.
You are advocating for failed strategies. You will NEVER convince the Jewish audience that they are despicable for their sentiments.
Jews rationally regard Israel as an historical great event, a community and state that they are primarily proud of, though that definitely compels difficult questions.
If your (Phil’s) goal is to tip the sentiment to shame of Israel, rather than transformation of Israel, then we are opponents.
No decent person could fail to be ashamed of Israel, what it has become.
To read the talkbacks in the Israeli news, to see the videos of the settlers abusing the Palestinians, to see the ugly reality instead of the shining hasbara illusion – how could anyone not feel shame for enabling all this, all these years?
The voices of the Ugly Israelis should be enough to convince anyone. There is no need to condemn them. They speak for themselves.
The problem is exposing people to the truth, breaking through the hasbara barrier.
It is difficult if not impossible to fake compassion. In your case, Mister Weiss, you have too many comments on record that evince a lack of compassion to attempt to fake it. You favor assimilation and report with glee Herzl’s Christmas tree and Kafka’s ignorance of when Jews would celebrate a bar mitzvah.
The problem when it comes specifically to Zionism is where will your anti Zionism lead us? You seem to think that the alternative to Zionism will look something like Manhattan- a land of diversity and tolerance. Whereas in fact there is no reason to believe that the alternative to Zionism will look any better than Lebanon or today’s Iraq. As the Arab rapper in Indulgence’s video stated: Zionism’s right wing and left wing are rowing towards a waterfall and they will fall off the ledge. What do you think that will look like? There is nothing compassionate about that vision for the future.
And as for your audience, it sounds like they are 3 to 1 against compassion.
On the contrary it is you that lacks compassion, and cannot see beyond your stereotypes and your fear and hate of others not like you. You can’t promote compassion by supporting an institution that is based on discrimination and prejudice.
The best examples of what could be in Israel are the groups such as Taayush and Anarchists Against the Wall, Combatants for Peace, the ISM and ICAHD and others. All show that compassion and understanding between Jews and Arabs in Israel is not only possible but is the only way to peace. But “peace” must include justice and equality for all.
A good description of the importance of this concept is this, from Michael Warschawki in Israel:
link to alternativenews.org
Warschawski’s point is a very good one. I have found the pragmatic approach extremely useful in getting discussions (as opposed to shouting matches) going. My basic pragmatic argument is that you can’t oppress people forever, and that as afraid as you may be of them now (hence the “need” for oppression), you are only creating a far more dangerous situation in the future. This opening has allowed me to discuss concepts of human rights and equality in a non-antagonistic way. Compassion is of course implicit in this approach.
I don’t think “wandering”‘s description was off the mark.
I’ve met some “combatants for peace” and they are inspiring in their rejection of warring. It was particularly enlightening to hear the Palestinian representative present in a fairly conservative synagogue near where I live.
I don’t include “Anarchists Against the Wall”, or even “ISM” as as principled as the two that I met from “Combatants for Peace”.
The significance of the two from “combatants for peace” for me was that they DE-EMPHASIZED the political agitation in importance, in favor of personal and psychological transformation.
Richard,
I think there is room and a real need for both approaches. Neither on its own is sufficient to bring about positive change. Were the situation not so urgent – especially for Palestinians – we could afford to focus only on the calm, measured, understanding approach. Palestinians (and to a much lesser extent Israelis) are suffering and dying every day. In my book, that calls for a good deal of anger and agitation, including boycotts, protests, and whatever else might help stop the suffering and work toward justice. Even actions that stand little chance of achieving real change can be important, if they help Palestinians feel they are not alone, and simply to express moral outrage . This is not appropriate in every venue and at all times, but it is vitally important. Accepting an unconscionable status quo in the name of gentle, civilised, persusaion, simply serves the cause of the stronger side – which is not idle, but employs every possible tactic, violent and non-violent, military and political, in order to prevent positive change.
By the way, all of the groups you mention (including Combatants for Peace) do amazing, positive and constructive work. I have had the privilege (as an Israeli Jew) of being active in one of them. In no way does support for BDS or political agitation preclude compassion and constructive dialogue.
I’ve heard about the Jewish zeal for justice until my ears are ready to fall off, and now I’m told that Israelis and their Jewish supporters in the diaspora are supposed to be shown compassion for their crimes! I guess it means something that the calls for compassion usually come from Jews the themselves. I say goose and gander! America and the West have been lectured by Jews about morals forever, especially over the last 60 years, so I see no reason to go light in return.