A review of Douglas Murray's "On Democracies and Death Cults" with broad discursions into Sam Kriss' article "Douglas Murray, gruesome toady" and the entire Israel-Hamas-Gaza Mess
A book that intensely affected my opinion on this conflict was We Belong To The Land by Elias Chacour, a memoir of a Christian Maronite priest in the West Bank who spent his life trying to nonviolently maneuver past Israeli manipulation of procedural outcomes. Israel can look reasonable and civilized on paper because it is in their interest to do so and their factions can easily agree on this, which obfuscates how frustrating and humiliating life can be for the manipulated.
Chacour was evacuated as a boy from his family's ancient Christian village so the IDF could sweep it for terrorists. They remained evacuated as he grew up and the inhabitants' request to reenter went through the court system. After decades the Israeli Supreme Court ordered the military to relinquish the village. They did - after using it as target practice for a bombing run. It can be easy to overlook this sort of thing if it's done with the proper paperwork, but it's excruciating for the people on the ground.
Later in the book he mentions the first intifada in the 80s, and how he disagrees with violence and believes that only peaceful methods can effect lasting change... and notes that, that said, it would be hard to find anyone he knew that was against it, because they were just that frustrated with trying to get Israel to let them do anything. His life's crusade, something that took many years of effort and negotiation and eventually international media coverage, was to get Israel to approve the building of a high school in his new village. You can imagine people looking at that, looking at their supply of saintly priests, working out how long it would take for a community college, and giving up on peaceful solutions.
Again, all of that might look above board, but my read on the situation is that Israeli factions put minorities through vicious anarchotyranny for the sake of interfaction rivalry and tribal animus. Hamas' character as a militia with a political party attached seems to be an evolutionary adaptation to Israeli factional preferences and how they shape assassinations. Arabs are some of the easiest people in the world to bribe; the squalor and subsequent rebellion of Palestinians seems to be entirely a policy choice.
For me, the Israeli story is more legible because the culture and values are more aligned with mine. I think this is true for almost all Americans, supporters of both sides. But supporters of Hamas are in a conflict with their own prevailing cultural norms.
It's easy to assume Israeli culture is pretty much what a country of American Jews would be like but they are notoriously disagreeable, contemptuous of "suckers" and disrespectful of lines. I have been told returnees get a note in their welcome packet warning that their children may become considerably less polite than they are used to. The apparent legibility of Israeli culture is useful politically but I do not think it stands up to scrutiny.
That’s a good article and I think it represents an important part of Israeli culture. I have been to Israel several times and regularly work with Israelis so I am somewhat familiar. There are also hard-nosed religious fanatics there that won’t stop at anything to reclaim the Holy Land. Yet I still claim that Israeli culture is much more like ours than Palestinian culture. The events of Oct 7 were an example that there is a difference.
Even the example of abuse Kriss gave seems like a familiar form of discipline breakdown that could happen in America.
I think if I was Joe Rogan I would have pointed out to Murray that there's nothing preventing him starting his own podcast and running it whatever way he sees fit.
A book that intensely affected my opinion on this conflict was We Belong To The Land by Elias Chacour, a memoir of a Christian Maronite priest in the West Bank who spent his life trying to nonviolently maneuver past Israeli manipulation of procedural outcomes. Israel can look reasonable and civilized on paper because it is in their interest to do so and their factions can easily agree on this, which obfuscates how frustrating and humiliating life can be for the manipulated.
Chacour was evacuated as a boy from his family's ancient Christian village so the IDF could sweep it for terrorists. They remained evacuated as he grew up and the inhabitants' request to reenter went through the court system. After decades the Israeli Supreme Court ordered the military to relinquish the village. They did - after using it as target practice for a bombing run. It can be easy to overlook this sort of thing if it's done with the proper paperwork, but it's excruciating for the people on the ground.
Later in the book he mentions the first intifada in the 80s, and how he disagrees with violence and believes that only peaceful methods can effect lasting change... and notes that, that said, it would be hard to find anyone he knew that was against it, because they were just that frustrated with trying to get Israel to let them do anything. His life's crusade, something that took many years of effort and negotiation and eventually international media coverage, was to get Israel to approve the building of a high school in his new village. You can imagine people looking at that, looking at their supply of saintly priests, working out how long it would take for a community college, and giving up on peaceful solutions.
Again, all of that might look above board, but my read on the situation is that Israeli factions put minorities through vicious anarchotyranny for the sake of interfaction rivalry and tribal animus. Hamas' character as a militia with a political party attached seems to be an evolutionary adaptation to Israeli factional preferences and how they shape assassinations. Arabs are some of the easiest people in the world to bribe; the squalor and subsequent rebellion of Palestinians seems to be entirely a policy choice.
Thanks for the recommendation! I have ordered the Chacour book. I'll try to remember to let you know once I've read it.
For me, the Israeli story is more legible because the culture and values are more aligned with mine. I think this is true for almost all Americans, supporters of both sides. But supporters of Hamas are in a conflict with their own prevailing cultural norms.
https://www.fisheaters.com/jc-freier.html
It's easy to assume Israeli culture is pretty much what a country of American Jews would be like but they are notoriously disagreeable, contemptuous of "suckers" and disrespectful of lines. I have been told returnees get a note in their welcome packet warning that their children may become considerably less polite than they are used to. The apparent legibility of Israeli culture is useful politically but I do not think it stands up to scrutiny.
That’s a good article and I think it represents an important part of Israeli culture. I have been to Israel several times and regularly work with Israelis so I am somewhat familiar. There are also hard-nosed religious fanatics there that won’t stop at anything to reclaim the Holy Land. Yet I still claim that Israeli culture is much more like ours than Palestinian culture. The events of Oct 7 were an example that there is a difference.
Even the example of abuse Kriss gave seems like a familiar form of discipline breakdown that could happen in America.
I think if I was Joe Rogan I would have pointed out to Murray that there's nothing preventing him starting his own podcast and running it whatever way he sees fit.
A question raised here is how much is Hamas really roadblock to Israel's policy goals versus actually aligned with it?