Two Israeli ad campaigns in recent years: “Israel: No one belongs here more than you” (“you” being the white middle-class American tourist) and “Israel: Not What You See in the News!” (paraphrased)
Number of Gazans dead today: at least 200
If you can’t figure out why this is unacceptable – if you insist on an eye-for-an-eye mentality, in which one Israeli eye is worth an infinite number of Palestinian eyes – then quite frankly, you’re a privileged fuck with no concept of how violence is perpetuated or what the phrase “human rights” actually means. (And will I delete your odious, bigoted comment? You bet.)
(Cross-posted at Modern Mitzvot.)
EDIT: Looks like Jeff and I posted our pieces at the same time.
EDIT #2: Matt points out the problem with my use of the phrase “an eye for an eye.” More explanation here.
Thanks for paying attention to this, Julie. I’ve been out of it as a blogger for some time now. But the situation is actually even worse and more convoluted that “that.” First, I while I don’t want to endorse Hamas’ specific ideology, it is true that (a) they are the duly and fairly elected governing party of the GS under basic law, and (b) they have been very reliable about honoring [unilateral] ceasefires with the IDF and Fatah during their time in office.
The rockets that have been fired from GS into Israeli territory were almost entirely done so by political rivals of Hamas, such as Fatah-affiliated Tanzim. It seems improbable that the Israeli Defense Force (IDF) would be unaware of this, and yet they have continued to collaborate with Fatah against Hamas in the GS “civil war.” (There have been two periods since Jan 2006 when Hamas’ militia ended their unilateral ceasefire and retaliated against the IDF, and during this time Hamas forces did in fact return fire against IDF artillery.)
It’s not unusual for IDF cointerinsurgency (COIN) strategy to be devious or byzantine, but this is pretty odd: bolstering Fatah in the GS even as IDF units stormed Fatah assets in the West Bank (example).
For a good essay on the 2006 phase of the Gaza-Hamas conflict, see “Israel’s failed-state strategy” (Juan Cole); on the subsequent shooting war between Fatah and Hamas, “The Palestinians’ war within” (Yassin Musharbash).
By the way, I want to make it clear that I don’t actually “blame” the population of Israel for this horrible situation. I blame the great powers of 1945-1949, who flatly refused to do anything constructive about the refugee problem in Europe (during the first four months after liberation, about a third of the survivors of the Nazi camps died while stuck in the camps. It was largely the efforts of Zionists that got the others out. Would that it were not so.
You have two things here-“white middle class american tourists” and hundreds of dead Gazans. I want to say something about the former and in no way do I wish to minimize the deaths of any people, my heart goes out to their families. I wish for there to be no more killing of anyone.
re: “white middle class american tourist” you left something out, you forgot to add a very pivotal word .
But when it comes to Israel the dominant paradigm in this world is one of racism. The UN said it, “zionism is racism”. Israel is considered an apartheid state, Israel is seen as white colonialist imperialist oppression of darker skinned “native” Palestinians etc.
While there are plenty of racist Jews I don’t believe racism is THE dominant paradigm when it comes to Israel. Because to accept that would require completely invisiblizing the Jewish people.
It would mean totally minimizing ALL of the history of Jewish oppression: the Inquisition, the pogroms, the expulsions, synagogue burnings, forced conversions… and our spirituality and religion too. Like how many Jews over the centuries have prayed “if I forget thee o Jerusalem? IT would mean treating Jewish suffering, oppression, spirituality, religion as if it is is NOTHING -completely irrelevant, we’ re just a bunch of racists who want to oppress darker skinned people, that’s the ONLY reason Jews are in Israel. And if those darker skinned people choose to lob missiles at Jewish communities or blow up buses-or kill Jews it’s totally not Jew hatred in the slightest. It’s fighting against colonialist RACISTS . Whereas if the Jews so much as have checkpoints it’s totally racism and oppression.
If there was a group that could fight for justice for the Palestinians without invisablizing the Jewish people I’d be glad to join it. But so far there is no such thing.
And that’s why you said “white middle class tourists” and left out the word “Jew”.
While there are plenty of racist Jews I don’t believe racism is THE dominant paradigm when it comes to Israel. Because to accept that would require completely invisiblizing the Jewish people.
The problem with this premise is that the issue is not Israeli/Jewish discrimination against Palestinian Arabs. The problem is that the State of Israel expropriated the land and water rights of the vast majority of Palestinians in 1948/49 and again in 1967-present. In the USA, “racism” is understood by most(?) Whites to refer to an individual vice, like rudeness or body odor. In fact, racism actually refers to a colonial system in which one class of people enjoys national possession of rights, territory, etc., and the other class[es] are regarded as non-members of the nation. In the case of Palestine, the excluded group consists of the indigenous population.
As I have mentioned above, this doesn’t mean that individual Israelis are racist, although no doubt some are. The problem is that the social order imposed by Zionism in Palestine is in fact a colonial one, and quite analogous to Apartheid.
[*] would mean totally minimizing ALL of the history of Jewish oppression: the Inquisition, the pogroms, the expulsions, synagogue burnings, forced conversions… and our spirituality and religion too.
In the context this sentence appears, this makes no sense. Palestinians are not to blame for any of these things. The Great Powers are.
Whereas if the Jews so much as have checkpoints it’s totally racism and oppression.
Using the term “Jew” for IDF poses serious problems. A majority of the Jews in the world live outside of Israel; those who serve in the IDF are conscripts, albeit by a republic. Many Jewish citizens are vehemently opposed to the relevant policies of the Israeli government; many more favor them only under misinformation or fear. Equating “Jew” with the policies of the IDF therefore includes too many people, accords too much agency to the participants, and excludes the paramount role of the Great Powers.
Having said this, you can’ t be trying to insist that the IDF confines itself to checkpoints for Palestinians. The creation of Israel meant the dispossession of hundreds of thousands of middle class yeoman farmers, merchants, and laborers. Several hundred villages were “cleansed”; since that time, the now-6-million strong refugee population has either emigrated or lived in abject squalor. Conditions are dire, and the Palestinians are frequently denied adequate water, let alone a livelihood, for months at a stretch.
Iamefromiami, I saw these two ads in venues (one on a billboard, and one in an in-flight magazine, I think) that didn’t have a specifically Jewish audience. I think the advertisers were trying to hype Israel as a mainstream tourist destination, not just a Jewish one.
re: Julie -sorry, I’m just so used to people referring to any pro-Israel Jews as white middle class colonizers (totally ignoring pro-Israel Jews who aren’t white and or middle class) that I responded out of habit. I thought you were obliquely referring to aliyah or something. Anyway, thanks for clarifying .
re: James comment–colonialist theory was exactly what I was talking about. In addition to that I mentioned individual racism. Colonialist theory only fits if you ignore things that don’t fit: such as the entire history and religion of the Jewish people .
That doesn’t mean I reject colonialist theory completely. I just don’t accept it as the PRIMARY paradigm.
OF course Palestinians aren’t to blame for the Holocaust. It’s just that see, a lot of Jews went straight from the Holocaust to Israel only to be instantly attacked by five surrounding Arab nations. No, the Palestinians aren’t to blame, why should they pay for the Holocaust? Just because millions of Jews were murdered that’s no reason for Arab nations and Palestinians to tolerate a Jewish presence in a land to which Jews have historic and spiritual/religious connection. But anyway sorry -I know how sick people are of hearing Jews natter on about the So called Holocaust.
And I don’t want to other or ignore the Roma and homosexuals xtians or anyone else murdered by the nazi’s who didn’t get a state of there own. Also I don’t want to overlook the Armenians. I cannot imagine what kind of people would violently attack ANYONE who just got out of the Holocaust.
Anyway so the UN formed the Jewish state. But why? I mean really. Couldn’t Jews just go to Israel and buy some land and live there peaceably if they wanted to? The answer is no. And it has been that way for centuries. Even after the Jewish state was formed Jews were not PERMITTED by the Muslims to go to the Western Wall: our MOST holy site, to pray. Colonialist theory requires you to completely overlook this. It also requires you to completely ignore the religious dimension and the fact that Islam IS a replacement theology. It requires you to see Jews ONLY as politically white.
Israel is not colonialism it is more like a national affirmative action. No it is not fair but it is addressing a long standing historical wrong.
Any and all injustices the Palestinians suffer in Israel can be solved by their renouncing violence and choosing non-violent means to address injustice. However, sadly this is not possible. Because it’s not just about the Palestinians. Right now a militant group associated with Iran has vowed vengance for the Gaza military strike. At the same time that Egypt is shooting Gazan’s who are trying to cross the border.
Anyway re: Julie again-I saw something on one of the feminist blogs, I forget which one, they talked about a feminist concert in Saudi Arabia. I don’t think anyone pointed out that Jews aren’t even allowed to visit there. No Jewish tourists allowed!. And I don’t think we’re allowed in Dubai oh wait no that’s just anyone with an Israel stamp on their passport. But whatever, not important.
Iamefromiami:
First, your tone is tiresome, and I say that as a Jew who sees some merit in much of what you say. Second, regarding what is and is not ignored: Your post ignores the entire history of Zionism and the settlement of Palestine, which is not as simple as most anti-Zionists I have read–even the non-antisemitic ones–would make it, but which is absolutely implicated in European imperialist and colonialist ideologies. Zionism was not a monolithic movement, and I am not trying to paint it as such. My point is, simply, that when one argues from a politically partisan position, such as the one you are taking, something of the other side’s experience/thinking is always ignored.
On another note, you wrote:
And if justice, real justice, called for a “one-state” solution, in which Israelis and Palestinians co-existed on equal terms, and the Palestinians advocated for that non-violently and achieved their goal, would you support it?
That doesn’t mean I reject colonialist theory completely. I just don’t accept it as the PRIMARY paradigm.
Well, unfortunately, Israel is a colony. Six million people (alive today) lost their homes as a result of its creation.
Even after the Jewish state was formed Jews were not PERMITTED by the Muslims to go to the Western Wall: our MOST holy site, to pray. Colonialist theory requires you to completely overlook this.
That’s because between 1948 and 1967, the Western Wall was in territory belonging to a country (Jordan) that did not have diplomatic relations with Israel. I have no clue what that has to do with colonialist theory, or, for that matter, what “colonialist theory” has to do with anything I have written.
It’s just that see, a lot of Jews went straight from the Holocaust to Israel only to be instantly attacked by five surrounding Arab nations
That’s not exactly what happened. I recommend you read Flappan, The Birth of Israel. He’s a citizen of Israel and veteran of the IDF, so it’s not like I’m recommending anything that’s anti-Jew. It’s a much more detailed account of the three critical conflicts of 1948-49, 1956, and 1967. To a large degree, the armed phase of the Arab-Israeli conflict was stimulated by diverse Zionist militia.
Please note that I have repeatedly insisted (and will insist again) that this was not the fault of the people who would become citizens of Israel. I’ve acknowledged the Shoah as forcing the Jewish population of Europe into aliyah. The fault lies with the Great Powers.
Pingback: Alas, a blog » Blog Archive » Once More, With Feeling
This seems so utterly oversimplified that it can’t be answered, can it? It is extraordinarily different from the current reality.
That’s a good thing, and a worthy goal. But because the mental leap is so great, and the goal so general, it becomes even more likely that any two individuals who are thinking of a one state solution will have very different visions in their head. IOW, I could happily support the solution that I imagine but that is far from a guarantee that I would support the solution you’re imagining when you ask the question.
Which is worse:
To kill X people today, or to kill one person a year for Y years, where Y > X?
Sailorman, you wrote:
Fair enough, and I really wasn’t trying to be specific, because the notion of a one-state solution, which I have, admittedly, heard put forth more often by Palestinian moderates in this country than by Jews or Israelis anywhere, is at one and the same time simple and elegant and profoundly complicated and convoluted. My point was that, if such a solution were where justice was, and it were arrived at non-violently, would iamefromiami accept it even if it meant–and here, I realize, is what I left out–that Israel lost its status as a Jewish state? (And I know that “lost its status as a Jewish state” is an idea that needs to be unpacked.)
Ah, I see what you mean now.
but I don’t think i can reply without completely derailing the thread, so I will not do so here.
Pingback: Alas, a blog » Blog Archive » What We Talk About (And Don’t Talk About) When We Talk About (And Don’t Talk About) antisemitism and Israel
Pingback: What We Talk About (And Don’t Talk About) When We Talk About (And Don’t Talk About) antisemitism and Israel « It’s All Connected…
Pingback: Richard Jeffrey Newman - What We Talk About (And Don’t Talk About) When We Talk About (And Don’t Talk About) antisemitism and Israel — 1