lisoosh.wordpress.com
Sorry Google, but you don't handle Mac platforms well.
Wednesday, July 25, 2007
Monday, June 18, 2007
Pedophile Ring Shut Down.
I'm a horrible blogger who never posts, but this sprang to my attention:
news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070618/ap_on_re_eu/britain_pedophile_ring
"LONDON - British police, with aid from U.S. investigators, have shattered a global Internet pedophile ring, rescuing 31 children and rounding up more than 700 suspects worldwide, authorities said Monday."
I don't normally advocate violence. But I hope every one of them experiences in jail exactly what they visited on those kids.
Tenfold.
news.yahoo.com/s/ap/20070618/ap_on_re_eu/britain_pedophile_ring
"LONDON - British police, with aid from U.S. investigators, have shattered a global Internet pedophile ring, rescuing 31 children and rounding up more than 700 suspects worldwide, authorities said Monday."
I don't normally advocate violence. But I hope every one of them experiences in jail exactly what they visited on those kids.
Tenfold.
Wednesday, December 27, 2006
Herzelia "Hasbara" Conference
The following is an edited version of the comment section from a post by Liza of Something Something detailing her disatisfaction with a conference on public perceptions of Israel abroad. Both her post and the all of the comments that followed give a great example of the debate that exists in the Israeli world, although it does not touch on all of the issues by a long shot. Well worth following the link for the full post.
somethingsomething.blogspot.com/2006/12/stop-being-verbal-vegetarians.html
Richard Landes said...
...
now my question to you is, do you not think that incitement to murder (actually genocide) is an integral part of palestinian culture, and if not, what do you make of the extensive evidence of precisely that? do you visit Palestinian Media Watch, or is that too bleak? too right wing? the real question is not whether or not it's any of these, but whether it's inaccurate.
it's not racist to point out that people are racist, and when those people are running the show and permeating the culture -- media, schools, mosques, sports -- with incitement to racial hatred (Jews are descendants of pigs and monkeys) and genocidal messages, it is a cultural reflection... it has nothing to do with genes, or race at all. that's just a piece of mud you sling at people who criticize people you don't want to offend. is abu mazen a racist?
...
i'd have said just the opposite: it's moral imbeciles like Jostein Gaarder (whom i responded to here), and an MSM of people who slavishly follow the Palestinian/David Israel/Goliath "framing story" no matter how much the evidence contradicts it (example here) who have contributed the most to Israel's vilification.
as for the bleak outlook, the lack of hope, i'd say that if you purchase your optimism at the price of any grappling with realism, then you live in a fool's paradise. the idea that israel needs to make a shift in its policies towards its neighbors (which i presume from the tenor of everything you've written - forgive and correct me if i'm wrong) means that israel needs to be more conciliatory, is precisely the attitude the conference was convened to call into question. the clear evidence of the last decade, esp clear in this last summer's war, is that israeli concessions invite aggression. i know some people (you?) believe that we need to make more concessions. but what if you're wrong?
as for hope for peace. if you had come to me and asked me, i might have had some interesting things to say. (i'm an optimist, i just don't purchase my optimism at the price of living in denial). the very fact that you hear what we have to say and conclude that we think there is no hope for peace, says more about you than it does us.
you remark: I found this concept to be utterly maddening and ignorant. It means that there is no hope for the future, and that our attempts to break down barriers and try to achieve a state of normalcy and mutual respect are futile, which is something that I simply refuse to accept.
i admire your courage, as i admire Lisa's, which is why i invited her. but the fact that you can be maddened by our remarks and not speak with us, that you can continue to strive for mutual respect with people who harbor profound hostility for us (in the hopes of peace, granted) and yet turn on us and treat us as the problem and the enemy for pointing out that we have real enemies, reflects badly on your ability to have respect for people who disagree with you. if you can respect palestinians and other arabs and muslims, and not people who are every bit as committed as you to the principles of civil society, just because they read the situation differently, then i'm not sure you are doing what you need to in order for us to achieve a real rather than a fatally imagined peace.
Wednesday, December 20, 2006 5:07:00 AM
Don Radlauer said...
Good post, Liza - and thanks for what appears to be a nice compliment! (Although all it actually expressed was a correlation; it leaves plenty of room for me to be stupid, charmless, and un-funny, as long as I do them all together. Hmph.)
I'm afraid that from what I saw of the conference (only the second day; I was too sick to come on Sunday), Liza's and Lisa's reactions seem entirely appropriate.
Richard Landes' argument about whether various forms of negative stuff are "integral" to Palestinian society is specious. It would be accurate enough to say that incitement, racism, and so on are an aspect of Palestinian culture and society; but to claim that they're "integral" implies that these elements are inextricably bound up with Palestian-ness; and if that's not racism, it's too damned close for comfort. Further, while Itamar Marcus and others do good work documenting the negative stuff that's out there, their work by no means demonstrates that that's all that's out there.
The problem with this conference (or at least with what I saw of it, and especially with the Monday morning sessions) was that it was dominated by an outlook that not only doesn't help Israel's public image, but actively works against us: the idea that Israel is always right, that the rest of the world is the enemy, and that our correct response is to close ranks and defend ourselves (hasbaraically or otherwise) as aggressively as possible. This approach doesn't work.
When we talk and write as if everything Israel does is wonderful and moral, all we do is make ourselves irrelevant to the people we want to convince. If we want to reach people, we need to be living on the same planet they're living on; and Danny Seaman, for one, is not living on the same planet as any of our target audience.
Sadly, many - if not most - of the people actively involved in Israeli hasbara are exactly the people who shouldn't be involved in it; and, as Ami pointed out in his comment, the people who should be leading Israel's defense aren't doing it.
Wednesday, December 20, 2006 10:40:00 PM
lisoosh said...
I was going to respond to Richard Landes post, but Don beat me to the punch, and quite effectively.
It would be good to reiterate that the focus of PMW is to uncover anti-Israel rhetoric and incitement to violence within the Palestinian territories, not to analyse the media in it's entirety and analyse everything produced, good and bad. They are not in the business of covering well balanced Palestinian journalists. I would certainly agree that it is delusional to ignore the pretty violent rhetoric that PMW uncovers, but it is no less delusional to focus on nothing else but that rhetoric.
I would also like to address the Jostein Gaarder incident. Liza covered this in depth. She also spent quite a bit of time in the Norwegian blogosphere (going to meet them on their own turf) explaining just how offensive and anti-semitic his piece was. It is just not true that Israeli leftists don't defend Israel when necessary. Even Mobius (Orthodox Anarchist) who is as left wing as they come (and is super critical of Israel) spent a couple of days combating a very anti-Israel, and factually incorrect, piece in the progressive on line magazine Salon.
What is true is that it is a thousand times more difficult to combat true anti-semitism and true rabid anti Zionist rhetoric when it crops up (and to be heard and taken seriously) when there are hordes of people running around screaming "Anti-Semitism" whenever someone legitimately criticises Israeli policy and actions.
As for Mr. Landes last paragraph, I hope that it was written in anger as it veers dangerously near the mantra of the right - that Jews must stick together no matter what the opinion and that all others, Arabs and Palestinians especially must be viewed as a dangerous, uncivilised "other". (Just a step away from that lovely insult, the "Self Hating Jew".) What ever happened to standing up for what is right? For what you believe?
I will agree with Mr. Landes on one thing - the different Israeli perspectives need to speak to each other. They have to. Israel has had military rule of the Palestinian population in the West Bank and Gaza for two generations now. Irrespective of any actions the Palestinians take, irrespective of what the world thinks, or the media says, we still haven't come to an agreement, as Israelis, with what we want to do.
Thursday, December 21, 2006 12:38:00 AM
lisoosh said...
Addendum;
During the war with Hizbollah some of the most vociferous and effective defenders of Israel were in fact the left wing bloggers.
While most of the right was wittering away with "I told you so's", blaming the left for the war (attacking other Jews, oh my, what happened to all that unity, and why not give Hizbollah credit where due?) and making plans to charge all left wing bloggers with treason, the left wing was actually out there, refuting Hizbollah propaganda among the Arab world and MSM.
Saturday, December 23, 2006 7:25:00 PM
lisoosh said...
Judith- "But to equate that to thousands of attempts (some successful) to deliberately kill the most vulnerable Israeli civilians in as gruesome a manner as possible "
I don't get the impression that Don is trying to equate them at all, rather point out that most people do exactly what you just did - respond to criticism of Israel by pointing to Palestinian violence. His point as I see it, is that Palestinian violence or the actions of terrorists does not excuse us from reflecting on our own actions or finding better ways of doing things.
In simple terms, just because my neighbour lets his dog s^^t in the yard doesn't mean I have to, that just leads to a bigger mess.
0Monday, December 25, 2006 12:34:00 PM
richard landes said...
response to lisoosh in italics
I don't get the impression that Don is trying to equate them [Israeli and Palestinian immoral behavior] at all, rather point out that most people do exactly what you just did - respond to criticism of Israel by pointing to Palestinian violence. His point as I see it, is that Palestinian violence or the actions of terrorists does not excuse us from reflecting on our own actions or finding better ways of doing things.
In simple terms, just because my neighbour lets his dog s^^t in the yard doesn't mean I have to, that just leads to a bigger mess.
this is, i think, a critical issue. on the one hand, it is characteristic of one school of israeli hasbara to say, "look, this is an awful neighborhood, and if my dog s**ts in the street and i don't pick it up under fire, you'll have to excuse me. this school has gotten more strident as the evidence of how vicious palestinian official culture is.
on the other, the other school, seeking dialogue, wants to downplay this focus since it consistently incenses Palestinians who feel, as one said in my dialogue, "you're dehumanizing us." the dangerous tendency here is, as i think DR did with me, to assume that if you point out how vicious Palestinians -- leaders secular and religious and their followers -- can be, then you really just want to excuse israeli behavior. as one friend said to me when i started on the al durah affair -- "you're whitewashing the occupation."
nothing of the sort, altho it may have the consequence of taking some of the moral heat off of israel as people begin to understand how depraved the tactics of her enemies.
the real dilemma we face is that, as a highly self critical culture, we run the risk of a) failing to defend ourselves when we're defamed (eg al durah), and b) failing to ask for self-criticism from the other side in the hopes of not upsetting them.
my position is that we all need to be self-critical, and to keep that self-criticism roughly in the same ball park for both sides. when our self-criticism lines up with their scapegoating, how are outsiders to understand what's going on?
right now the demonization of israel feeds off of a dysfunctional relationship between highly self-critical israelis/jews who will use prophetic rhetoric to reprimand what they don't like in Israel (racism, apartheid, war crimes), and highly demonizing arabs/muslims and "progressive revolutionaries" who admit no fault, and embrace paranoid world-views (9-11 conspiracy, israel=nazis, protocols).
if we are to "find better ways to do things," we can't live in a moral vacuum where what's going on over there doesn't exist. nor can we afford to call people on our side evil and enemies because they embarrass us in our dialogues. nice cops and tough cops are powerless when they fight among each other.
Tuesday, December 26, 2006 12:39:00 PM
Judith said...
"In simple terms, just because my neighbour lets his dog s^^t in the yard doesn't mean I have to, that just leads to a bigger mess."
What I don't do, and what I bet you don't do either except with regard to Israel, is to assume that the neighbor letting his dog sh*t in the yard is your fault, that if you criticize yourself enough for your dog sh*tting in the yard your neighbor will stop, that your neighbor makes a perfunctory show of reining in his dog but never actually does, when called on this he says he can't control the dog, but refuses to put it down (and the dog also barks all night and bited neighborhood children), and criticizes you without accepting any blame for himself, when you apologize for your dog sh*tting in his yard he never apologizes when he does the same. And all the neighbors pay him tons of money to have his dog keep sh*tting in your yard, and call you racist for pointing out that he never stops or apologizes. And the neighborhood association keeps blaming you and giving him money for doggy treats, all the while tisktsking whenever his dog sh*ts in the yard. Oh and the neighbor belongs to the local mafia which threatens to firebomb your house if you keep complaining and also walks around announcing loudly that you don't belong there and should be killed. if you buy a gun in response to the threats everyone in the neighborhood condemns you for being violent.
If this was your neighborhood what would you do?
Tuesday, December 26, 2006 3:02:00 PM
lisoosh said...
Judith:
"What I don't do, and what I bet you don't do either except with regard to Israel, is to assume that the neighbor letting his dog sh*t in the yard is your fault, that if you criticize yourself enough for your dog sh*tting in the yard your neighbor will stop"
Judith, I'd love to be able to respond to you, but as long as you are going to debate what you WANT me to have said, rather than what I said, that is impossible. You don't know me, you don't know what I think or do in regard to Israel or anything else, nor have we had enough cyber conversations for you to be able to deduce what I think or believe.
Rather than respond to the "left" by following the "rights" description of what the left has to say, try actually listening.
Tuesday, December 26, 2006 5:43:00 PM
lisoosh said...
Richard:
" "you're whitewashing the occupation."
nothing of the sort, altho it may have the consequence of taking some of the moral heat off of israel as people begin to understand how depraved the tactics of her enemies. "
Not an unworthy goal. Trouble is it doesn't work. They way it is being handled now, it looks like a powerful, rich nation with a billion dollar military budget is unable to handle an uprising without resorting to overkill and continuing to resort to pulling out the victim card.
To the media, whatever sells papers/TV advertising is a good story and the whole little guy fighting for freedom/big guy stopping him is one of the great classic stories, no matter who the actors are. The Jews had the upper hand in that narrative when Israel was formed, now we don't.
What is really depressing is that disorganized as they are, the Palestinians are doing a much better job of framing the narrative than we are. Our response up till now, and the one I see fixated on here, is the typical response of crying out "But that's not faaaaiiir! They're cheating! We're the victims! And look at Sudan, that's MUCH worse.".
I'll spell this out slowly - the issue is PROPAGANDA, and we suck at it. "Pallywood" was a good start, but handled unprofessionally and obviously prepared by someone partisan. These stories need to be put together well, given a news twist and sold off to bigger outlets. Being antagonistic toward journalists doesn't help, if you want someone to get a story out telling them they suck and you have no respect for them isn't going to do it.
Instead of assuming that anyone on the left just wants to apologize for Israel or is a "self-critical Jew" "self-hating Jew" or some other lovely little soundbite (and what a self defeating little snippet of copywriting that is, what a waste of ingenuity), perhaps someone could get the message that many of us are very supportive of Israel (when applicable) but painfully embarrased by Israeli and Diaspora efforts at framing the narrative.
And of course the other issue is to stop obsessing over propaganda, take all of that misplaced energy and to solve the problem at its root, therefore negating the need for Hasbara.
Tuesday, December 26, 2006 5:48:00 PM
Judith said...
"Judith, I'd love to be able to respond to you, but as long as you are going to debate what you WANT me to have said, rather than what I said, that is impossible."
Um, I didn't do that. I wrote what *I* wanted to say. I just said that you probably don't act passive and apologetic if some neighbor behaves that way with his dog. There is nothing in that comment about "wanting you to have said" anything.
Tuesday, December 26, 2006 6:14:00 PM
lisoosh said...
Judith -
Ok, lets try this again.
"What I don't do, and what I bet you don't do either except with regard to Israel, is to assume that the neighbor letting his dog sh*t in the yard is your fault, that if you criticize yourself enough for your dog sh*tting in the yard your neighbor will stop"
You said:
a. That in regards to Israel I assume that the violence is "my" fault.
b. If I criticize myself enough, it will make it stop.
How have you not just put words into my mouth?
Tuesday, December 26, 2006 6:23:00 PM
Judith said...
Okay, Lisoosh. But I was pushing the analogy as far as I could and just caricaturing attitudes in general, I wasn't describing you in particular (and you are right I have no idea what you think). But I can see where it would come across that way.
Tuesday, December 26, 2006 6:29:00 PM
lisoosh said...
Judith -
'if you criticize yourself enough for your dog sh*tting in the yard your neighbor will stop"
As I have time this morning I'll even add more.
I don't think that "criticizing myself" or "aplogizing for my actions" will affect anyone elses behaviour.
I do believe that TAKING RESPONSIBILITY for my own actions makes me a GROWN UP. I do believe that the ability to look with clear eyes at a situation is the only way that situation can be honestly resolved.
Whether or not the "other side" shows any inclination to take responsibility for itself is irrelevant. I'm not interested in their level of self reflection or moral or personal growth, only my own.
Nothing wrong with propaganda in the applicable place and done well. There is EVERYTHING wrong with believing your own propaganda. That's one of the things stopping the Palestinians with moving forward. I'd rather it didn't happen to Israel too.
Wednesday, December 27, 2006 4:34:00 PM
Judith said...
"I do believe that TAKING RESPONSIBILITY for my own actions makes me a GROWN UP. I do believe that the ability to look with clear eyes at a situation is the only way that situation can be honestly resolved."
I do too. We seem to disagree on what taking responsibility entails, also on what the situation really is.
i will be in Israel till Jan 4, would love to meet. A neutral facilitator might be good. :-)
somethingsomething.blogspot.com/2006/12/stop-being-verbal-vegetarians.html
Richard Landes said...
...
now my question to you is, do you not think that incitement to murder (actually genocide) is an integral part of palestinian culture, and if not, what do you make of the extensive evidence of precisely that? do you visit Palestinian Media Watch, or is that too bleak? too right wing? the real question is not whether or not it's any of these, but whether it's inaccurate.
it's not racist to point out that people are racist, and when those people are running the show and permeating the culture -- media, schools, mosques, sports -- with incitement to racial hatred (Jews are descendants of pigs and monkeys) and genocidal messages, it is a cultural reflection... it has nothing to do with genes, or race at all. that's just a piece of mud you sling at people who criticize people you don't want to offend. is abu mazen a racist?
...
i'd have said just the opposite: it's moral imbeciles like Jostein Gaarder (whom i responded to here), and an MSM of people who slavishly follow the Palestinian/David Israel/Goliath "framing story" no matter how much the evidence contradicts it (example here) who have contributed the most to Israel's vilification.
as for the bleak outlook, the lack of hope, i'd say that if you purchase your optimism at the price of any grappling with realism, then you live in a fool's paradise. the idea that israel needs to make a shift in its policies towards its neighbors (which i presume from the tenor of everything you've written - forgive and correct me if i'm wrong) means that israel needs to be more conciliatory, is precisely the attitude the conference was convened to call into question. the clear evidence of the last decade, esp clear in this last summer's war, is that israeli concessions invite aggression. i know some people (you?) believe that we need to make more concessions. but what if you're wrong?
as for hope for peace. if you had come to me and asked me, i might have had some interesting things to say. (i'm an optimist, i just don't purchase my optimism at the price of living in denial). the very fact that you hear what we have to say and conclude that we think there is no hope for peace, says more about you than it does us.
you remark: I found this concept to be utterly maddening and ignorant. It means that there is no hope for the future, and that our attempts to break down barriers and try to achieve a state of normalcy and mutual respect are futile, which is something that I simply refuse to accept.
i admire your courage, as i admire Lisa's, which is why i invited her. but the fact that you can be maddened by our remarks and not speak with us, that you can continue to strive for mutual respect with people who harbor profound hostility for us (in the hopes of peace, granted) and yet turn on us and treat us as the problem and the enemy for pointing out that we have real enemies, reflects badly on your ability to have respect for people who disagree with you. if you can respect palestinians and other arabs and muslims, and not people who are every bit as committed as you to the principles of civil society, just because they read the situation differently, then i'm not sure you are doing what you need to in order for us to achieve a real rather than a fatally imagined peace.
Wednesday, December 20, 2006 5:07:00 AM
Don Radlauer said...
Good post, Liza - and thanks for what appears to be a nice compliment! (Although all it actually expressed was a correlation; it leaves plenty of room for me to be stupid, charmless, and un-funny, as long as I do them all together. Hmph.)
I'm afraid that from what I saw of the conference (only the second day; I was too sick to come on Sunday), Liza's and Lisa's reactions seem entirely appropriate.
Richard Landes' argument about whether various forms of negative stuff are "integral" to Palestinian society is specious. It would be accurate enough to say that incitement, racism, and so on are an aspect of Palestinian culture and society; but to claim that they're "integral" implies that these elements are inextricably bound up with Palestian-ness; and if that's not racism, it's too damned close for comfort. Further, while Itamar Marcus and others do good work documenting the negative stuff that's out there, their work by no means demonstrates that that's all that's out there.
The problem with this conference (or at least with what I saw of it, and especially with the Monday morning sessions) was that it was dominated by an outlook that not only doesn't help Israel's public image, but actively works against us: the idea that Israel is always right, that the rest of the world is the enemy, and that our correct response is to close ranks and defend ourselves (hasbaraically or otherwise) as aggressively as possible. This approach doesn't work.
When we talk and write as if everything Israel does is wonderful and moral, all we do is make ourselves irrelevant to the people we want to convince. If we want to reach people, we need to be living on the same planet they're living on; and Danny Seaman, for one, is not living on the same planet as any of our target audience.
Sadly, many - if not most - of the people actively involved in Israeli hasbara are exactly the people who shouldn't be involved in it; and, as Ami pointed out in his comment, the people who should be leading Israel's defense aren't doing it.
Wednesday, December 20, 2006 10:40:00 PM
lisoosh said...
I was going to respond to Richard Landes post, but Don beat me to the punch, and quite effectively.
It would be good to reiterate that the focus of PMW is to uncover anti-Israel rhetoric and incitement to violence within the Palestinian territories, not to analyse the media in it's entirety and analyse everything produced, good and bad. They are not in the business of covering well balanced Palestinian journalists. I would certainly agree that it is delusional to ignore the pretty violent rhetoric that PMW uncovers, but it is no less delusional to focus on nothing else but that rhetoric.
I would also like to address the Jostein Gaarder incident. Liza covered this in depth. She also spent quite a bit of time in the Norwegian blogosphere (going to meet them on their own turf) explaining just how offensive and anti-semitic his piece was. It is just not true that Israeli leftists don't defend Israel when necessary. Even Mobius (Orthodox Anarchist) who is as left wing as they come (and is super critical of Israel) spent a couple of days combating a very anti-Israel, and factually incorrect, piece in the progressive on line magazine Salon.
What is true is that it is a thousand times more difficult to combat true anti-semitism and true rabid anti Zionist rhetoric when it crops up (and to be heard and taken seriously) when there are hordes of people running around screaming "Anti-Semitism" whenever someone legitimately criticises Israeli policy and actions.
As for Mr. Landes last paragraph, I hope that it was written in anger as it veers dangerously near the mantra of the right - that Jews must stick together no matter what the opinion and that all others, Arabs and Palestinians especially must be viewed as a dangerous, uncivilised "other". (Just a step away from that lovely insult, the "Self Hating Jew".) What ever happened to standing up for what is right? For what you believe?
I will agree with Mr. Landes on one thing - the different Israeli perspectives need to speak to each other. They have to. Israel has had military rule of the Palestinian population in the West Bank and Gaza for two generations now. Irrespective of any actions the Palestinians take, irrespective of what the world thinks, or the media says, we still haven't come to an agreement, as Israelis, with what we want to do.
Thursday, December 21, 2006 12:38:00 AM
lisoosh said...
Addendum;
During the war with Hizbollah some of the most vociferous and effective defenders of Israel were in fact the left wing bloggers.
While most of the right was wittering away with "I told you so's", blaming the left for the war (attacking other Jews, oh my, what happened to all that unity, and why not give Hizbollah credit where due?) and making plans to charge all left wing bloggers with treason, the left wing was actually out there, refuting Hizbollah propaganda among the Arab world and MSM.
Saturday, December 23, 2006 7:25:00 PM
lisoosh said...
Judith- "But to equate that to thousands of attempts (some successful) to deliberately kill the most vulnerable Israeli civilians in as gruesome a manner as possible "
I don't get the impression that Don is trying to equate them at all, rather point out that most people do exactly what you just did - respond to criticism of Israel by pointing to Palestinian violence. His point as I see it, is that Palestinian violence or the actions of terrorists does not excuse us from reflecting on our own actions or finding better ways of doing things.
In simple terms, just because my neighbour lets his dog s^^t in the yard doesn't mean I have to, that just leads to a bigger mess.
0Monday, December 25, 2006 12:34:00 PM
richard landes said...
response to lisoosh in italics
I don't get the impression that Don is trying to equate them [Israeli and Palestinian immoral behavior] at all, rather point out that most people do exactly what you just did - respond to criticism of Israel by pointing to Palestinian violence. His point as I see it, is that Palestinian violence or the actions of terrorists does not excuse us from reflecting on our own actions or finding better ways of doing things.
In simple terms, just because my neighbour lets his dog s^^t in the yard doesn't mean I have to, that just leads to a bigger mess.
this is, i think, a critical issue. on the one hand, it is characteristic of one school of israeli hasbara to say, "look, this is an awful neighborhood, and if my dog s**ts in the street and i don't pick it up under fire, you'll have to excuse me. this school has gotten more strident as the evidence of how vicious palestinian official culture is.
on the other, the other school, seeking dialogue, wants to downplay this focus since it consistently incenses Palestinians who feel, as one said in my dialogue, "you're dehumanizing us." the dangerous tendency here is, as i think DR did with me, to assume that if you point out how vicious Palestinians -- leaders secular and religious and their followers -- can be, then you really just want to excuse israeli behavior. as one friend said to me when i started on the al durah affair -- "you're whitewashing the occupation."
nothing of the sort, altho it may have the consequence of taking some of the moral heat off of israel as people begin to understand how depraved the tactics of her enemies.
the real dilemma we face is that, as a highly self critical culture, we run the risk of a) failing to defend ourselves when we're defamed (eg al durah), and b) failing to ask for self-criticism from the other side in the hopes of not upsetting them.
my position is that we all need to be self-critical, and to keep that self-criticism roughly in the same ball park for both sides. when our self-criticism lines up with their scapegoating, how are outsiders to understand what's going on?
right now the demonization of israel feeds off of a dysfunctional relationship between highly self-critical israelis/jews who will use prophetic rhetoric to reprimand what they don't like in Israel (racism, apartheid, war crimes), and highly demonizing arabs/muslims and "progressive revolutionaries" who admit no fault, and embrace paranoid world-views (9-11 conspiracy, israel=nazis, protocols).
if we are to "find better ways to do things," we can't live in a moral vacuum where what's going on over there doesn't exist. nor can we afford to call people on our side evil and enemies because they embarrass us in our dialogues. nice cops and tough cops are powerless when they fight among each other.
Tuesday, December 26, 2006 12:39:00 PM
Judith said...
"In simple terms, just because my neighbour lets his dog s^^t in the yard doesn't mean I have to, that just leads to a bigger mess."
What I don't do, and what I bet you don't do either except with regard to Israel, is to assume that the neighbor letting his dog sh*t in the yard is your fault, that if you criticize yourself enough for your dog sh*tting in the yard your neighbor will stop, that your neighbor makes a perfunctory show of reining in his dog but never actually does, when called on this he says he can't control the dog, but refuses to put it down (and the dog also barks all night and bited neighborhood children), and criticizes you without accepting any blame for himself, when you apologize for your dog sh*tting in his yard he never apologizes when he does the same. And all the neighbors pay him tons of money to have his dog keep sh*tting in your yard, and call you racist for pointing out that he never stops or apologizes. And the neighborhood association keeps blaming you and giving him money for doggy treats, all the while tisktsking whenever his dog sh*ts in the yard. Oh and the neighbor belongs to the local mafia which threatens to firebomb your house if you keep complaining and also walks around announcing loudly that you don't belong there and should be killed. if you buy a gun in response to the threats everyone in the neighborhood condemns you for being violent.
If this was your neighborhood what would you do?
Tuesday, December 26, 2006 3:02:00 PM
lisoosh said...
Judith:
"What I don't do, and what I bet you don't do either except with regard to Israel, is to assume that the neighbor letting his dog sh*t in the yard is your fault, that if you criticize yourself enough for your dog sh*tting in the yard your neighbor will stop"
Judith, I'd love to be able to respond to you, but as long as you are going to debate what you WANT me to have said, rather than what I said, that is impossible. You don't know me, you don't know what I think or do in regard to Israel or anything else, nor have we had enough cyber conversations for you to be able to deduce what I think or believe.
Rather than respond to the "left" by following the "rights" description of what the left has to say, try actually listening.
Tuesday, December 26, 2006 5:43:00 PM
lisoosh said...
Richard:
" "you're whitewashing the occupation."
nothing of the sort, altho it may have the consequence of taking some of the moral heat off of israel as people begin to understand how depraved the tactics of her enemies. "
Not an unworthy goal. Trouble is it doesn't work. They way it is being handled now, it looks like a powerful, rich nation with a billion dollar military budget is unable to handle an uprising without resorting to overkill and continuing to resort to pulling out the victim card.
To the media, whatever sells papers/TV advertising is a good story and the whole little guy fighting for freedom/big guy stopping him is one of the great classic stories, no matter who the actors are. The Jews had the upper hand in that narrative when Israel was formed, now we don't.
What is really depressing is that disorganized as they are, the Palestinians are doing a much better job of framing the narrative than we are. Our response up till now, and the one I see fixated on here, is the typical response of crying out "But that's not faaaaiiir! They're cheating! We're the victims! And look at Sudan, that's MUCH worse.".
I'll spell this out slowly - the issue is PROPAGANDA, and we suck at it. "Pallywood" was a good start, but handled unprofessionally and obviously prepared by someone partisan. These stories need to be put together well, given a news twist and sold off to bigger outlets. Being antagonistic toward journalists doesn't help, if you want someone to get a story out telling them they suck and you have no respect for them isn't going to do it.
Instead of assuming that anyone on the left just wants to apologize for Israel or is a "self-critical Jew" "self-hating Jew" or some other lovely little soundbite (and what a self defeating little snippet of copywriting that is, what a waste of ingenuity), perhaps someone could get the message that many of us are very supportive of Israel (when applicable) but painfully embarrased by Israeli and Diaspora efforts at framing the narrative.
And of course the other issue is to stop obsessing over propaganda, take all of that misplaced energy and to solve the problem at its root, therefore negating the need for Hasbara.
Tuesday, December 26, 2006 5:48:00 PM
Judith said...
"Judith, I'd love to be able to respond to you, but as long as you are going to debate what you WANT me to have said, rather than what I said, that is impossible."
Um, I didn't do that. I wrote what *I* wanted to say. I just said that you probably don't act passive and apologetic if some neighbor behaves that way with his dog. There is nothing in that comment about "wanting you to have said" anything.
Tuesday, December 26, 2006 6:14:00 PM
lisoosh said...
Judith -
Ok, lets try this again.
"What I don't do, and what I bet you don't do either except with regard to Israel, is to assume that the neighbor letting his dog sh*t in the yard is your fault, that if you criticize yourself enough for your dog sh*tting in the yard your neighbor will stop"
You said:
a. That in regards to Israel I assume that the violence is "my" fault.
b. If I criticize myself enough, it will make it stop.
How have you not just put words into my mouth?
Tuesday, December 26, 2006 6:23:00 PM
Judith said...
Okay, Lisoosh. But I was pushing the analogy as far as I could and just caricaturing attitudes in general, I wasn't describing you in particular (and you are right I have no idea what you think). But I can see where it would come across that way.
Tuesday, December 26, 2006 6:29:00 PM
lisoosh said...
Judith -
'if you criticize yourself enough for your dog sh*tting in the yard your neighbor will stop"
As I have time this morning I'll even add more.
I don't think that "criticizing myself" or "aplogizing for my actions" will affect anyone elses behaviour.
I do believe that TAKING RESPONSIBILITY for my own actions makes me a GROWN UP. I do believe that the ability to look with clear eyes at a situation is the only way that situation can be honestly resolved.
Whether or not the "other side" shows any inclination to take responsibility for itself is irrelevant. I'm not interested in their level of self reflection or moral or personal growth, only my own.
Nothing wrong with propaganda in the applicable place and done well. There is EVERYTHING wrong with believing your own propaganda. That's one of the things stopping the Palestinians with moving forward. I'd rather it didn't happen to Israel too.
Wednesday, December 27, 2006 4:34:00 PM
Judith said...
"I do believe that TAKING RESPONSIBILITY for my own actions makes me a GROWN UP. I do believe that the ability to look with clear eyes at a situation is the only way that situation can be honestly resolved."
I do too. We seem to disagree on what taking responsibility entails, also on what the situation really is.
i will be in Israel till Jan 4, would love to meet. A neutral facilitator might be good. :-)
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)