Thursday, July 17, 2014
The Search for a Progressive Reagan. By Chrystia Freeland.
The Search for a Progressive Reagan. By Chrystia Freeland. Politico, July 15, 2014.
There’s Something Very Ugly In This Rage Against Israel. By Brendan O’Neill.
There’s something very ugly in this rage against Israel. By Brendan O’Neill. spiked, July 15, 2014.
Is the Left anti-Semitic? Sadly, it is heading that way. By Brendan O’Neill. The Telegraph, July 27, 2014.
Is the Left anti-Semitic? Sadly, it is heading that way. By Brendan O’Neill. The Telegraph, July 27, 2014.
O’Neill [rage against Israel]:
In the
virtual world, too, the line between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism has become
blurrier during this latest Gaza conflict. When a Danish journalist published a
photo of what he claimed to be a group of Israelis in Sderot eating popcorn
while watching Israeli missiles rain on Gaza, it became a focal point of fury
with Israelis – every newspaper published the pic and Amnesty tweeted about it
– and it generated the expression of some foul views. Israelis (not Israel in
this case) are “disgraceful”, “murderous, racist”, “inhuman scum”, “pigs”, etc,
said angry tweeters. It wasn’t long before actual bona fide anti-Semites were
getting in on this rage against Israeli people, with one racist magazine
publishing the Sderot picture under the headline “Rat-Faced Israeli Jews Cheer and Applaud Airstrikes on Gaza Strip.” The speed with which what purported to
be an anti-war sentiment aimed at Israel became a warped fury with Israeli
people, and the ease with which demonstrations against Israeli militarism
became slurs against or physical attacks on Jews, suggests there is something
extremely unwieldy about fashionable anti-Israel sentiment, something that
allows it to slip, sometimes quite thoughtlessly, from being a seemingly
typical anti-war cry to being something much uglier, prejudiced and ancient in
nature.
Such is
the visceral nature of current anti-Israel sentiment that not only is the line
between anti-Zionism and anti-Semitism becoming harder to see – so is the line
between fact and fiction. As the BBC has reported, the wildly popular hashtag
#GazaUnderAttack, which has been used nearly 500,000 times over the past eight
days to share shocking photographs of the impact of Israel’s assault on Gaza,
is extremely unreliable. Some of the photos being tweeted (and then retweeted
by thousands of other people) are actually from Gaza in 2009. Others show dead
bodies from conflicts in Iraq and Syria. Yet all are posted with comments such
as, “Look at Israel’s inhumanity.” It seems the aim here is not to get to the
truth of what is happening in Gaza but simply to rage, to yell, to scream, to
weep about what Israel is doing (or not doing, as the case may be), and the
more publicly you weep, the better, for it allows people to see how sensitive
you are to Israeli barbarism. It’s about unleashing some visceral emotion, which
means such petty things as accuracy and facts count for little: the expression
of the emotion is all that matters, and any old photo of a dead child from
somewhere in the Middle East – Iraq, Syria, Lebanon – will suffice as a prop
for one’s public emotionalism.
How has
this happened? How has opposing Israeli militarism gone from being one facet of
a broader anti-imperialist position, as it was in the 1980s, to being the main,
and sometimes only, focus of those who claim to be anti-war? Why does being opposed
to Israel so often and so casually tip over into expressions of disgust with
the Israeli people and with the Jews more broadly? It’s because, today, rage
with Israel is not actually a considered political position. It is not a
thought-through take on a conflict zone in the Middle East and how that
conflict zone might relate to realpolitik or global shifts in power. Rather, it
has become an outlet for the expression of a general feeling of fury and
exhaustion with everything - with Western society, modernity, nationalism,
militarism, humanity. Israel has been turned into a conduit for the expression
of Western self-loathing, Western colonial guilt, Western self-doubt. It has
been elevated into the most explicit expression of what are now considered to be
the outdated Western values of militaristic self-preservation and progressive
nationhood, and it is railed against and beaten down for embodying those
values. It is held responsible, not simply for repressing the Palestinian
desire for statehood, but for continuing to pursue virtues that we sensible
folk in the rest of the West have apparently outgrown and for consequently
being the source of war and terrorism not only in the Middle East but pretty
much everywhere. A poll of Europeans discovered that most now consider Israel
to be the key source of global instability.
This is
where we can see what the new anti-Zionism shares in common with the old
anti-Semitism: both are about finding one thing in the world, whether it’s a
wicked state or a warped people, against which the rest of us might rage and
pin the blame for every political problem on Earth.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)