Although, I was subscribed before because I really liked the title Rarely Certain, I am one of the people that joined on that initial "So it goes" post. I realize audience capture is a big thing, and I respect people who make a living on their writing via the subscriber model. But I did want to clarify something though, what really caught my eye about your initial post wasn't detachment. No, Of the various stacks I read, I think yours was one of the few that pointed their reaction at themselves. A lot of people approached this with an attempt at detachment, the "I'll just learn enough and offer a better system" or "Here's the realist unbiased history of them all", or a classic in my country, "You're either with us or with the terrorists". What I really respect, and still do, is your approach of trying to honestly understand what's going on with you first. I'm no philosopher, but I think the one of the biggest takeaways for me from the philosophers & writers after WW2 was this message of "Humans create models to understand complex systems. So that we don't keep repeating this mistake. First and foremost, we should try to give context to this humanity".
Again, really like your approach. Even though, I hate to resort to the tribal side taking, I find myself sympathizing more with the Palestinians here. This probably has more to do with my emotional and faith based disdain for government censorship. Ok, that's enough rambling, and I apologize for what is likely to come off as the ramblings of an insane person. I'm going to do the annoying thing of ending another comment with a quote, but not even the real quote, more of a paraphrase of a quote.
Your comment is what makes these efforts seem worthwhile. And your perspective also coming from a place of self-knowledge too - that is something I respect.
I hear you on the point about detachment maybe not serving as the best description of that first piece.
I thought of including some observations on the various 'cancellations' of pro-Palestinian/Hamas people too, which has chipped yet again at freedom of expression. But the thing was getting unwieldy.
Thank you, sincerely, for being here and sharing your definitely sane thoughts.
Hi Mike, I concur. Anti-Zionism is not necessarily motivated by antisemitism. AND isn’t it curious that the State of Israel is so frequently vilified for its State violence, when all nation States are founded on asymmetries of power and violence? I can’t think of one that isn’t.
It’s also curious (as you pointed out) to consider what’s happening to Muslims in other parts of the world. For example, the Uighurs in China (more than a million Uighur Muslims detained in concentration camps, forced labor, forced sterilization of women). Or the Rohingya in Myanmar (gang rape, genocide of the ethnic Muslims in this country). Or the long-running proxy war Saudi Arabia is conducting in Yemen – with air strikes specifically targeting civilians, use of chemical weapons – resulting in a huge humanitarian crisis: 4 million people displaced, 24 million people starving – including 12 million children. These occupations seem to reflect much greater violence against Muslim populations and much more of a humanitarian crisis – both in scope and scale – than what’s happening in the occupied territories of Israel.
And yet there are not huge demonstrations about this violence. We do not hear worldwide calls for the boycott of Saudi Oil or of cell phones manufactured in China. Why is the half century Israeli occupation so uniquely the focus of outrage, particularly among self-identified progressives? There seems to be a preoccupation with Israel as the world’s foremost colonial villain and I fear the tacit assumption is that the state of Israel is, per se, illegitimate with no right to exist. It is seen merely as a “colonial occupation”.
No doubt it’s easier to vilify a single State actor half-way around the world, than to reflect on our own enmeshment with State violence and the displacement of indigenous peoples. After all, unless our forebears were indigenous to the land in which we live, we are ourselves part of a “colonial/settler culture”. So, we might ask U.S. protesters whose forebears were from England, Poland, Taiwan, Argentina: What is your claim to the land on which you now live, which was forcibly taken through genocide, rape, torture, and enslavement of whole peoples? Or are you a “occupier” a “settler”? Should you, in good conscience, go back to the lands of your ancestors and cede the land on which your people settled to the original inhabitants.
In capitals all over the world, hundreds of thousands of protestors have been out on the streets in solidarity with the Palestinian cause. “End the Israeli Occupation” has been a ubiquitous slogan. Hmm. Where are the mass protests in the U.K. demanding an end to the occupation of aboriginal lands in Australia and the repatriation of English settlers back to Great Britain? The lack of self-awareness is staggering. No recognition in these protests of Great Britain’s previous occupation of Palestine or role in the original partition. So far, no mass demonstrations in the U.K. about the proposed deportation of asylum seekers to Rwanda, with eerie echoes of settling post-holocaust Jews in Palestine. (History doesn’t repeat; it rhymes.)
If it isn’t antisemitism, I do have to wonder, why Israel is consistently singled out as the archetypal villain, the stand-in for all colonialism and State violence. And if it’s only intellectual laziness or a misguided desire to belong on the part of “progressives”, please, please – a little less self-righteousness and a little more nuance and humility.
Yes, you touch what seems to be the core unspoken truth of this.
Sometimes I look at things as though they were a drama, with characters occupying a carefully crafted role in the narrative structure. Since we (Homo Sapiens) are demonstrably storytellers I sometimes wonder if that is part of the unconscious driving force in our reactions.
The Jews in particular seem never to have not been a Story.
I'm guessing there are plenty of theories about this way of seeing history, which I don't know about. I can't be having an original thought here.
What scares me is that every story ends in a dénouement and I can't shake a feeling that this one will be tragic.
As for the contradictions and blind spots of leftish liberal Progressivism, maybe these can be seen as rooted in plot devices. To promote that ideology necessarily demands suspension of disbelief.
Also, thank you for a compelling and rich comment. It would make a tidy essay in itself.
Indeed, this situation does seem to be playing out as a tragedy. If we refract these events through a narrative lens (and I’m thinking of Hayden White’s oldie but goodie, Metahistory), perhaps it’s easier for self-identified Progressives to view the current conflict through a “Romantic” lens – with heroes and villains and a clear moral framework. Where good can triumph over evil. Seen through a tragic lens, both sides lay claim to being the injured party and both sides will commit terrible violence that they see as justified, leading with a kind of inevitability to the horror that’s unfolding.
It seems to work as hero struggle or tragedy and I obviously need to familiarise myself with White !
As an aside, relating to how we relate to the 'characters', it's interesting to notice my own unease as the much touted Hamas 'command centre' fails to materialise in the al-Shifa hospital.
This now feels like the point in the story where everything is getting worse before it gets better.
(As an aside, given that Hamas is so sophisticated at PR, though, I'd be surprised if they would leave such a thing for the world to see. I think Israel is unwise to stake too much on being able to show us a room full of non-medical computer terminals and a hotline to Tehran. If I'd been advising Hamas those are things I would have told them to dismantle before October 7th.
I'm predicting that the IDF will produce evidence that there *had been* a hidden 'command centre' and whether we believe them or not will have been determined before that happens).
Mike,
Although, I was subscribed before because I really liked the title Rarely Certain, I am one of the people that joined on that initial "So it goes" post. I realize audience capture is a big thing, and I respect people who make a living on their writing via the subscriber model. But I did want to clarify something though, what really caught my eye about your initial post wasn't detachment. No, Of the various stacks I read, I think yours was one of the few that pointed their reaction at themselves. A lot of people approached this with an attempt at detachment, the "I'll just learn enough and offer a better system" or "Here's the realist unbiased history of them all", or a classic in my country, "You're either with us or with the terrorists". What I really respect, and still do, is your approach of trying to honestly understand what's going on with you first. I'm no philosopher, but I think the one of the biggest takeaways for me from the philosophers & writers after WW2 was this message of "Humans create models to understand complex systems. So that we don't keep repeating this mistake. First and foremost, we should try to give context to this humanity".
Again, really like your approach. Even though, I hate to resort to the tribal side taking, I find myself sympathizing more with the Palestinians here. This probably has more to do with my emotional and faith based disdain for government censorship. Ok, that's enough rambling, and I apologize for what is likely to come off as the ramblings of an insane person. I'm going to do the annoying thing of ending another comment with a quote, but not even the real quote, more of a paraphrase of a quote.
"The easiest person to fool is yourself" -Feynman
Your comment is what makes these efforts seem worthwhile. And your perspective also coming from a place of self-knowledge too - that is something I respect.
I hear you on the point about detachment maybe not serving as the best description of that first piece.
I thought of including some observations on the various 'cancellations' of pro-Palestinian/Hamas people too, which has chipped yet again at freedom of expression. But the thing was getting unwieldy.
Thank you, sincerely, for being here and sharing your definitely sane thoughts.
Hi Mike, I concur. Anti-Zionism is not necessarily motivated by antisemitism. AND isn’t it curious that the State of Israel is so frequently vilified for its State violence, when all nation States are founded on asymmetries of power and violence? I can’t think of one that isn’t.
It’s also curious (as you pointed out) to consider what’s happening to Muslims in other parts of the world. For example, the Uighurs in China (more than a million Uighur Muslims detained in concentration camps, forced labor, forced sterilization of women). Or the Rohingya in Myanmar (gang rape, genocide of the ethnic Muslims in this country). Or the long-running proxy war Saudi Arabia is conducting in Yemen – with air strikes specifically targeting civilians, use of chemical weapons – resulting in a huge humanitarian crisis: 4 million people displaced, 24 million people starving – including 12 million children. These occupations seem to reflect much greater violence against Muslim populations and much more of a humanitarian crisis – both in scope and scale – than what’s happening in the occupied territories of Israel.
And yet there are not huge demonstrations about this violence. We do not hear worldwide calls for the boycott of Saudi Oil or of cell phones manufactured in China. Why is the half century Israeli occupation so uniquely the focus of outrage, particularly among self-identified progressives? There seems to be a preoccupation with Israel as the world’s foremost colonial villain and I fear the tacit assumption is that the state of Israel is, per se, illegitimate with no right to exist. It is seen merely as a “colonial occupation”.
No doubt it’s easier to vilify a single State actor half-way around the world, than to reflect on our own enmeshment with State violence and the displacement of indigenous peoples. After all, unless our forebears were indigenous to the land in which we live, we are ourselves part of a “colonial/settler culture”. So, we might ask U.S. protesters whose forebears were from England, Poland, Taiwan, Argentina: What is your claim to the land on which you now live, which was forcibly taken through genocide, rape, torture, and enslavement of whole peoples? Or are you a “occupier” a “settler”? Should you, in good conscience, go back to the lands of your ancestors and cede the land on which your people settled to the original inhabitants.
In capitals all over the world, hundreds of thousands of protestors have been out on the streets in solidarity with the Palestinian cause. “End the Israeli Occupation” has been a ubiquitous slogan. Hmm. Where are the mass protests in the U.K. demanding an end to the occupation of aboriginal lands in Australia and the repatriation of English settlers back to Great Britain? The lack of self-awareness is staggering. No recognition in these protests of Great Britain’s previous occupation of Palestine or role in the original partition. So far, no mass demonstrations in the U.K. about the proposed deportation of asylum seekers to Rwanda, with eerie echoes of settling post-holocaust Jews in Palestine. (History doesn’t repeat; it rhymes.)
If it isn’t antisemitism, I do have to wonder, why Israel is consistently singled out as the archetypal villain, the stand-in for all colonialism and State violence. And if it’s only intellectual laziness or a misguided desire to belong on the part of “progressives”, please, please – a little less self-righteousness and a little more nuance and humility.
Yes, you touch what seems to be the core unspoken truth of this.
Sometimes I look at things as though they were a drama, with characters occupying a carefully crafted role in the narrative structure. Since we (Homo Sapiens) are demonstrably storytellers I sometimes wonder if that is part of the unconscious driving force in our reactions.
The Jews in particular seem never to have not been a Story.
I'm guessing there are plenty of theories about this way of seeing history, which I don't know about. I can't be having an original thought here.
What scares me is that every story ends in a dénouement and I can't shake a feeling that this one will be tragic.
As for the contradictions and blind spots of leftish liberal Progressivism, maybe these can be seen as rooted in plot devices. To promote that ideology necessarily demands suspension of disbelief.
Also, thank you for a compelling and rich comment. It would make a tidy essay in itself.
Indeed, this situation does seem to be playing out as a tragedy. If we refract these events through a narrative lens (and I’m thinking of Hayden White’s oldie but goodie, Metahistory), perhaps it’s easier for self-identified Progressives to view the current conflict through a “Romantic” lens – with heroes and villains and a clear moral framework. Where good can triumph over evil. Seen through a tragic lens, both sides lay claim to being the injured party and both sides will commit terrible violence that they see as justified, leading with a kind of inevitability to the horror that’s unfolding.
It seems to work as hero struggle or tragedy and I obviously need to familiarise myself with White !
As an aside, relating to how we relate to the 'characters', it's interesting to notice my own unease as the much touted Hamas 'command centre' fails to materialise in the al-Shifa hospital.
This now feels like the point in the story where everything is getting worse before it gets better.
(As an aside, given that Hamas is so sophisticated at PR, though, I'd be surprised if they would leave such a thing for the world to see. I think Israel is unwise to stake too much on being able to show us a room full of non-medical computer terminals and a hotline to Tehran. If I'd been advising Hamas those are things I would have told them to dismantle before October 7th.
I'm predicting that the IDF will produce evidence that there *had been* a hidden 'command centre' and whether we believe them or not will have been determined before that happens).