The Israel/Palestine Discourse Monopoly

[Samael_Khan]

So an interesting and important point that a lot of you have brought up is that you live in America and that the conflict is personal to you because your tax dollars gets given to the war effort. That is very conscientious.

 

[Samael_Khan]

For one, it is constantly on the news, so we see what is happening there on a daily basis. And the loss of civilian life in Gaza is devastatingly high. When we daily see images of dead and dying children and the anguish of their parents it's unimaginable to many of us that this is still continuing. And outside powers like the USA, and Iran, to name but two players, pouring in money and weapons into the warring factions is sure to keep the conflict going which will only increase the loss of innocent life.

The cost of civilian life in Gaza is shocking. And America funds the war machine. On both sides the loss of civilian life is tragic.

 

[Revoltingest]

After many requests, you continue to avoid explaining the historical context you use to make such claims.

Your continual questioning of context is strange.
Everyone else understands my response to the
OP, even those who disagree.

 

[Debater Slayer]

Excellent OP, you beat me to the punch. I was going to include the phrase "selective outrage"

Closer to the conflict we have Syria and Yemen, and I think between those two, over 500,000 civilians have been killed. Within a few hundred miles of Israel. Crickets.

The coverage of the conflicts in Syria, Yemen, Libya, Iraq, and Sudan as well as resultant issues has been a cornerstone of Arab media and public discourse for the last 12 years, since the "Arab Spring." It has included a wide range of issues including, but not limited to, death tolls and humanitarian crises (e.g., the famine in Yemen and the gas attacks in Syria), displacement and refugees, economic effects, rebuilding efforts, long-term political plans, and international aid.

I don't know which country or its media you're talking about when you say that there have been "crickets," but that's certainly not the case when it comes to the Arab world's discourse about these issues since at least as far back as 2011.

For lack of an agreed upon term, I'm going to use "woke" to summarize the post-modern, anti-logic, anti-science, anti-West, divisive ideology that has managed to capture universities, then silicon valley, and now the media.

This seems almost entirely focused on, or at least supposed to be applicable to, the Western world. The vast majority of the Arab world is Muslim, and Islam is fundamentally against the subset of postmodern ideas that assert "no universal truth" or "subjectivity of truth." The two are polar opposites.

It also seems to me an extremely oversimplification to assert that universities, Silicon Valley, and the media are "captured" by a "post-modern, anti-logic, anti-science, anti-West, divisive ideology." Large portions of Western media are predominantly sympathetic to Israel and the West, and there's too much variation in the stances of universities and tech companies for them to be "captured" by any specific ideology or worldview.

I think that the woke, anti-Western-civilization ideology is driving much of the attention. This conflict is fairly unique, because if you believe in the woke, oppressed vs. oppressor worldview, then you have Israel as a "Western oppressor" and Hamas as being the not-West, "oppressed".

Most of the other massively destructive conflicts we're talking about don't fit as nicely into the oppressed vs. oppressor, woke ideology.

Many European and American politicians and media outlets have been paying considerable attention to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict ever since its earliest days. It was the UK that promised to create Israel, after all, and the US has had common interests with Israel for decades. The idea that the attention is a nascent phenomenon emerging from "woke ideology" doesn't seem to me to have any substantial backing.

I also see an issue in using the term "Western civilization" (and "Eastern civilization," equally) as if it were rigorously defined, precisely due to its lack of a rigorous, clearly delineated, and universal definition (which is also due to multiple factors), but that's a topic for another thread. The other points still apply either way.

 

[Samael_Khan]

Thanks for the insight

Every channel on TV has that conflict. It's everywhere.
Now the FBI is publishing to watch out for crime based on the conflict.

Because my government puts billions of dollars into the mess. Today was the first time that I saw an allocation 21m going to palestinian humanitarian aid.

I was sick of the ukrainian mess and when the US started publishing reducing the money that divide, within days... 10/7 terrorist attack broke out.

Far less media.


The middle east conflict has been a US issue, since the UN opened it's doors over half a century ago.

Thanks for the insight. It didn't occur to me that your tax dollars is used by your government to fund foreign wars. So then it is your duty to either defend it or protests against that type of spending.

 

[Revoltingest]

That may be a perception bias. People, like me, who find the actions of both sides equally despicable may utter their opinion once, if even that, so that only the partisans remain in the debate. You only hear the loud voices.

I find Israel to be more despicable than Hamas.
Why?
Israel created Hamas & other opposition groups
by cruelty to, murder of, oppression of, & theft
from Palestinians. And Israel has it's 11:1 kill
ratio....which is increasing.

 

[Kenny]

Hi there,

I am interested in hearing peoples motivation behind discussing the Israeli/Palestinian conflict. Why is it popular in discourse and what motivates people to support either side, often with such emotional investment, especially if they are not Israeli or Palestinian?

And why do people focus on this often prioritising iy over other conflicts around the world? An example is the conflict in DRC which is an insane humanitarian crisis with a long history, yet the plight of these people are relatively neglected:

DR Congo: An unprecedented crisis goes ignored

Recent months have brought a dramatic deterioration in the situation in eastern DR Congo, where countless civilians are attacked with impunity. Extreme levels of violence, hunger, and displacement ...

www.nrc.no

That is an EXCELLENT observation.

https://www.reuters.com/investigates/special-report/sudan-politics-darfur-attacks/

They said that the reason Hamas is acting that way Israel is because of oppression. Interestingly enough, the effort is the same, the massacres the same, the rape is the same, but you can’t blame South Sudan. Thousands upon thousands are being killed… but silence again the Arabs that are committing attrocities.

Maybe because they are using a false narrative to justify their efforts against Jewish people?

Do we see a commonality?

Ultimately, I think it has to do with end-time prophecies where the focal point is Israel… but that is because of my signature.

Kuwait: Rape Of A Nation

The stories of rape, torture and murder coming out of Kuwait read like an anthology of Iraqi insanity. But there was a logic at work: Iraq's occupation forces intended to erase the conquered nation's identity, and they meant to do it fast.

www.newsweek.com

What drives these atrocities?

 

[Samael_Khan]

It has exposed a great deal of anti-israel and anti-jewish bias and bigotry. It is similar to the George Floyd protests and the BLM movement which exposed institutional racism in the criminal justice system in America against black and brown people.

This sort of bigotry has been in hiding, and potentially effects everyone. When one group is stereotyped, it makes it easier to stereotype others. Bigotry and bias is a mindset. It's a cognitive malfunction, but, it's also like a contagious disease.

It's important to push back against it, and hopefully, enlighten those who are unaware of their own inherent unwarranted negative judgements based on class.

I agree. It has actually revealed a lot of agendas like BLM did.

My take, some which you might not agree with and maybe might not have been expressed on here before:

- People are using the war to fuel their anti semitic conspiracies.

- People struggle to differentiate between Zionist and Jew. And there are Zionists who are anti Semitic, like many Christian Zionists. But on the outside they all meld together as a group to cause confusion. A clear distinction must be delineated so that the bigots cant ride the hero wave.

- There is gross dehumanisation of Jews in this conflict because bigots think they deserve it, as people have been using this conflict to fuel jewish conspiracy theories

- There is gross dehumanisation of Palestinians because of anti Muslim fearmongering, anti arab racism that has been happening for years, and pro Israeli favouritism because of european Jewish influence amongst the capitalist Elite because they are seen as superior due to their culture.

- In my opinion this conflict is creating a negative view of both jews and muslims. It is fueling bigots on both sides.

 

[Samael_Khan]

That may be a perception bias. People, like me, who find the actions of both sides equally despicable may utter their opinion once, if even that, so that only the partisans remain in the debate. You only hear the loud voices.

True. But also, where I live, having spoken to various people, certainly muslims are always protesting this and speaking about it and those of the white minority tend to bring it up as a popular topic. I think that the loud voices are influencing the population for the most part.

 

[Samael_Khan]

In no particular order....
- My tax dollars are given to Israel to oppress, kill, & rob Palestinians.
- Israel is a brutal apartheid state that is committing war crimes &
violent conquest.
- Israel foments much of the trouble in the Mid-East that involves USA.

Thanks for the insight. This makes sense to me.

 

[Samael_Khan]

When it comes to US media, I might look at what they cover and how they cover it, but I also pay attention to what they don't cover (or certain pieces of information which might be missing in a news story).

When I was a kid first learning about the topic, it was often mentioned within the context of Cold War geopolitics which was the main issue of the day. Israel was considered to be on our side, while their enemies were presumed to be on the Soviet side.

After the Cold War ended, the focus of coverage on world events seemed to shift a bit, although Israel and the Middle East in general were always prominent. It's in a strategic part of the world - a crossroads of many ancient trading routes.

Of course, it's an old political tactic to distract the public with overseas wars. It has helped to fire up the masses and unify them, although in this case, the public seems quite divided over the conflict.

That last sentence makes me think of Goldstein from 1984. The foreign enemy is used to keep the local population in a lull about what the elite is doing in your own country.

I think that in the case of the US, the government and corporations, the capitalist elite, promote what serves their financial interests. So I often see what interests of resources and power certain actions of a government serve.

With Israel, America is funding them, so obviously it is in their financial and power interests for them and the media to side with Israel and dehumanise the Palestinians.

When it comes to the DRC for instance, it is a fact that the CIA and Belgium assassinated Patrice Lumumba which means they had personal interest in destabilizing the country. They want the Cobalt and other resources. So the media isnt that concerned with what happens in DRC because peace in that region is against American interests.

So yes the middle east is a strategic part of the world and so is DRC.

 

[Samael_Khan]

@Samael_Khan, Comments like the one above demand correction. They are happening everyday all over the world. I am working on a thread right now trying to correct this sort of outrageous, ignorant mischaracterization of the Israeli's response when comparing the enemy they are facing.

This is why the dabate MUST happen. Because ignorant outsiders accuse israel if being equal to Hamas. Hamas gang raped and disemboweled innocent women. They forcibly seized control of Gaza. Tortured their political rivals. Hung one of them from a communication tower. They burned people alive. These are some of the worst of the worst atrocities that can be done to a human being. Hamas has produced a small army of these sort of human-monsters. I have been very careful with my sourcing for this information. I avoid biased reporting.

Here's someone who is equating the Israeli response to Hamas as equally dispicable. That is incredibly dangerous to jewish people everywhere. The hate crimes against jewish people are spiking in america and around the globe.

I agree that the debate must happen.

I think a good response to what you are saying are these questions:

How many Gazan civilians do the Israeli government have to kill in order for us to say that they are equivalent or worse than Hamas?

Is it perhaps style of killing and torture that matters?

Is it perhaps that Israel are killing from a distance as opposed to the personalised violation of women that Hamas committed?

My take is that they are both bad for different reasons. And if Israel just massacred Hamas alone I would say good riddence, even with a few civilian casualties. But that isnt what is happening now.

Another question i would like to ask is:

Have you as a Jew and Zionist (I assume) asked yourself what criteria you have for determining whether Israel commits war crimes or are a terrorist government? At what point would Israels methods of eliminating the enemy be dispicable and intolerable to you?


Is it that

 

[libre]

And why do people focus on this often prioritising iy over other conflicts around the world?

I think there are many reasons why Israel is a focus.

• Israel is the main vantage point from which US Imperialism operates in the Middle East, and making it a central point of tension right between Africa, Asia and Europe. It is now a centerpiece in the United States plans and ability to project power.
• During the last century European influence over the third world was vastly reduced and we entered an era of decolonization. During a period where much of the rest of the world was beginning decolonization, the attempts of US/Europe to encourage Jewish settlement to Palestine caught the attention of those engaging in this anti-colonial struggle.

The reason for why South Africans support Palestine is very straightforward in my view. Mandela considered the PLO to be his comrades and that their struggle was just as legitimate as the struggle of the ANC. Further, Israel was relatively light in many respects on the Apartheid state, and tailed considerably behind the international community.

 

[Samael_Khan]

Tha

Excellent OP, you beat me to the punch. I was going to include the phrase "selective outrage"

Closer to the conflict we have Syria and Yemen, and I think between those two, over 500,000 civilians have been killed. Within a few hundred miles of Israel. Crickets.

For lack of an agreed upon term, I'm going to use "woke" to summarize the post-modern, anti-logic, anti-science, anti-West, divisive ideology that has managed to capture universities, then silicon valley, and now the media.

I think that the woke, anti-Western-civilization ideology is driving much of the attention. This conflict is fairly unique, because if you believe in the woke, oppressed vs. oppressor worldview, then you have Israel as a "Western oppressor" and Hamas as being the not-West, "oppressed".

Most of the other massively destructive conflicts we're talking about don't fit as nicely into the oppressed vs. oppressor, woke ideolog

Glad you like my OP!

So I am a person who to an extent is anti- west, anti cololonial, anti-neo-colonial and believe in the oppressed vs oppressor worldview. I am following Steve Bikos Black Consciousness philosophy so how could I not be.

I do think that Israel is a colonist state, which was supported by Britain, but I can understand why it happened because of what happened during the holocaust. The Jews had to look out for their own in world where nobody else looked out for them for milleniums. But also I think the Israeli government could have done things quite differently and not become, in my opinion, the pigs in animal farm. Which is tragic. But that doesnt give Hamas the right to kill and rape Israeli civilians, because then they too have become the Animal Farm Pigs.

I think those liberal kids in universities in yhe west tend to be misguided. They need something to fight for. But they fight because in their privileged lives they live too cushy and want to feel that they are doing something important. And often their causes are tone deaf to the people they are supposedly supporting because the cause is a fad to them, like another pair of nike shoes, and half the time they oppress those yhey are fighting for because they believe they are right over the people who are actually suffering.

In this case they are fighting human rights with the Palestinian cause without the historical knowledge. Yet their ignorance and virtue signalling style causes them to not be concerned with Sudan because it isnt trendy to support.

 

[Samael_Khan]

I think there are many reasons why Israel is a focus.

• Israel is the main vantage point from which US Imperialism operates in the Middle East, and making it a central point of tension right between Africa, Asia and Europe. It is now a centerpiece in the United States plans and ability to project power.
• During the last century European influence over the third world was vastly reduced and we entered an era of decolonization. During a period where much of the rest of the world was beginning decolonization, the attempts of US/Europe to encourage Jewish settlement to Palestine caught the attention of those engaging in this anti-colonial struggle.

The reason for why South Africans support Palestine is very straightforward in my view. Mandela considered the PLO to be his comrades and that their struggle was just as legitimate as the struggle of the ANC. Further, Israel was relatively light in many respects on the Apartheid state, and tailed considerably behind the international community.

Great insight.

The PLO were indeed our comrades during the liberation struggle. It is actually damning to Israel that they were one of the last few countries to be sympathetic to the apartheid state in South Africa. Which might indicate the reason behind their attitudes towards Palestinians.

 

[Jayhawker Soule]

I agree that the debate must happen.

I think a good response to what you are saying are these questions:

How many Gazan civilians do the Israeli government have to kill in order for us to say that they are equivalent or worse than Hamas?

Is it perhaps style of killing and torture that matters?

Is it perhaps that Israel are killing from a distance as opposed to the personalised violation of women that Hamas committed?

My take is that they are both bad for different reasons. And if Israel just massacred Hamas alone I would say good riddence, even with a few civilian casualties. But that isnt what is happening now.

Another question i would like to ask is:

Have you as a Jew and Zionist (I assume) asked yourself what criteria you have for determining whether Israel commits war crimes or are a terrorist government? At what point would Israels methods of eliminating the enemy be dispicable and intolerable to you?


Is it that

I would favor an immediate halt to the IDF assault coupled with a persistent demand that the world community insist, first and foremost, on the immediate release of all hostages and sanction any and all efforts that impede that release.

It's interesting to note that a difference between Israel and Hamas is that the former could greatly benefit from such an approach while the latter would see it as a strategic defeat. I see failure to acknowledge Hamas as being fully (but not solely) culpable in the disaster faced by the citizens of Gaza intollerable.

 

[icehorse]

The coverage of the conflicts in Syria, Yemen, Libya, Iraq, and Sudan as well as resultant issues has been a cornerstone of Arab media and public discourse for the last 12 years, since the "Arab Spring." It has included a wide range of issues including, but not limited to, death tolls and humanitarian crises (e.g., the famine in Yemen and the gas attacks in Syria), displacement and refugees, economic effects, rebuilding efforts, long-term political plans, and international aid.

I don't know which country or its media you're talking about when you say that there have been "crickets," but that's certainly not the case when it comes to the Arab world's discourse about these issues since at least as far back as 2011.

I'm quite heartened to hear that, thanks!

This seems almost entirely focused on, or at least supposed to be applicable to, the Western world. The vast majority of the Arab world is Muslim, and Islam is fundamentally against the subset of postmodern ideas that assert "no universal truth" or "subjectivity of truth." The two are polar opposites.

It also seems to me an extremely oversimplification to assert that universities, Silicon Valley, and the media are "captured" by a "post-modern, anti-logic, anti-science, anti-West, divisive ideology." Large portions of Western media are predominantly sympathetic to Israel and the West, and there's too much variation in the stances of universities and tech companies for them to be "captured" by any specific ideology or worldview.

Yes, my post is taking a very Western-centric view. And yes, as I've said, I was simplifying a very complex trend. So here's another simplification - probably true statistically, but certainly admitting many exceptions:

- Western right wing media is more apt to be pro-Israel
- Western left wing media is more apt to be pro-Palestinian.

And, as I said to another poster, I'd be happy to discuss my ideological capture claims in another thread.

Many European and American politicians and media outlets have been paying considerable attention to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict ever since its earliest days. It was the UK that promised to create Israel, after all, and the US has had common interests with Israel for decades. The idea that the attention is a nascent phenomenon emerging from "woke ideology" doesn't seem to me to have any substantial backing.

Indeed. But I think the underlying reasons have evolved. So woke wasn't nearly as big 30 or 40 years ago, but it's big now, and I'll stand by my assertion that one big reason that this conflict gets so much attention in the West - verses other, far bloodier conflicts in the ME - is that this one fits so cleanly into the woke, "oppressed vs. oppressor" worldview. Whereas the other conflicts don't fit this worldview very cleanly.

 

[icehorse]

Your continual questioning of context is strange.
Everyone else understands my response to the
OP, even those who disagree.

Your over-simplified assertions seem impossible to defend given the high complexity of the situation. But I don't want to derail this thread, there is another thread designed for just this topic.

 

[Bthoth]

NO ONE understands this situation fully. No one! It's insanely complex and twisty-turny. That's why I rail against everyone who thinks they can make well informed, simplistic declarations on this topic.

To you it may be twisty-turny as you suggest that the topic is based on the last few months. The issue has been a problem for decades and if you had watched the divide for as long as I have, the underlying issue of what the problem is about, does stand out.

I am aware that UNESCO added the focal problem to the world heritage list proving to me, that far more than I comprehend the problem. Heck when i brought it up here, it was observed by others and it was my discounting of the need, want and desire as a pity fest, it turned off certain persons to even admit or address the applicability with facts and foundation.

Some folk are afraid to even talk about it, because if more understood the problem as it is, far more would turn against israel or my preference is just make it off limits as the UNESCO designation actually did decades ago.

I think I care about the people more than you do.

If you did, you would focus on the issues and problems with honest assessment, versus keeping a bias.
The israelis narrative is not the true account and completely omits the focal problem.

That said, I care about them from a utilitarian, long view, not the events of a few months.

That sure sounds nice but if you claim to have no idea or that NO one knows, then you make that line irrational.

 

[Debater Slayer]

I'm quite heartened to hear that, thanks!

No problem. Al-Jazeera English (as just one example) has extensive content on all of those conflicts and issues spanning more than a decade, if anyone would like to verify what I said regarding that themselves.

Yes, my post is taking a very Western-centric view. And yes, as I've said, I was simplifying a very complex trend. So here's another simplification - probably true statistically, but certainly admitting many exceptions:

- Western right wing media is more apt to be pro-Israel
- Western left wing media is more apt to be pro-Palestinian.

I agree that the above is generally accurate, although I would also say that some media that may be considered left-wing are still not explicitly pro-Palestinian, if at all.

Indeed. But I think the underlying reasons have evolved. So woke wasn't nearly as big 30 or 40 years ago, but it's big now, and I'll stand by my assertion that one big reason that this conflict gets so much attention in the West - verses other, far bloodier conflicts in the ME - is that this one fits so cleanly into the woke, "oppressed vs. oppressor" worldview. Whereas the other conflicts don't fit this worldview very cleanly.

I think the civil war in Syria, for example, could easily fit into that worldview, since Assad and his forces could be seen as the oppressors, and similarly, Saudi Arabia could be seen as the oppressor of Yemen.

It seems to me that Western media tend to focus more on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict because Israel is a major ally of the West in the Middle East, and it also has many citizens who are of Western origin or dual nationals of Western countries. In the US in particular, evangelical Zionism also generates significant interest in the region, a unique religious factor that doesn't exist for any other country in the region.

Saudi Arabia is in an advantageous position against Yemen, and since it's also an ally of the US (despite the weakening of their relations in recent years) and has been supported by the US against Yemen, it makes sense to me that its atrocities in Yemen are not getting as much coverage in Western media as the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.

I do believe that pro-Palestinian sentiments and expression are increasing in some countries, but that seems to me to be driven by many factors that extend far beyond "woke ideology" (however one defines that).