Thank you for writing this. In psychology one of the most insidious forms of abuse is offending from the victim position. When an entire group of people do this the results are horrific. The U.S. support of this is morally reprehensible.
Since I wrote that post, I have been reminded that most scholars of international politics say nation states do not have morality. As a citizen of one, I wish mine did and find myself yearning for my national government to act morally.
This may be unrealistic. Indeed, the Realists would say so.
I find the Realist employs rather shallow and lazy reasoning. It is self-serving when it comes from one of the powerful elite who make policy. It may remind you of the sophisticated abuser who can give you many reasons why he must be justified in his abuse.
The Realist refuses to accept the responsibility that it is persons who set up and then support the nation state. There is no nation w/o the people, so we are all morally responsible for what the nation does.
Words strung together do not void responsibility for actions. Applies to you, me, Putin, Biden, and Trump.
Blinne Ne Ghralaigh gave a speech for the ages that must be listened to. She cooly and methodically, step by step, laid out the evidence of genocide. A masterful and totally convincing exposition that will eliminate any doubt that Israel is carrying out a genocide against the Palestinian people.
Why don't you care about what Hamas did to Israelis, or the moral failure of Iran, Qatar, or Turkey in permitting and encouraging Hamas to carry them out? It just seems extraordinarily biased.
You suspect I like Hamas, that violent right-wing political formation? Really? Is it required in your mind that I denounce Hamas before talking about South Africa's case about right-wing Israeli genocide in Gaza. I knew someone, would call for that. And there you are.
Sure, there is always context. Germans felt hurt by the losses following WWI - doesn't excuse in any way genocide against Jews. Israelis were hurt by Hamas - doesn't excuse genocide against Palestinians. Each act is separate and requires moral justifications on its own terms, outside of socially constructive historical narratives. Sure, Palestinians have some really problematic narratives, but so do Israelis, and so does Joe Biden. Listen to the testimony! That is all I ask.
You didn't answer the question. Why do you talk about what Israel does and not about what Hamas did? Maybe you have a good reason I just haven't thought of. But it sure seems you care a lot more about one than the other, just from what you choose to write about. It seems that you are holding them to different moral standards.
It's definitely not "required", it's your forum and you can post whatever you want. But it makes you look bad. You don't seem much like the person I used to know and admire.
I obviously can’t speak for. Charles. For me the difference lives in the fact that I am the citizen of a country that because it’s a democracy makes me as a voting citizen culpable to a degree for its actions. Given the amount of military aid the U.S. is sending to Israel with none of the normal checks on it being used “responsibly” (is there such a thing) then speaking out against this and making others aware of the ICJ findings on Israel is our moral duty.
I think the US could do a lot about Hamas, too. For example, we have a lot of influence with Egypt, which we could use to make them allow innocent civilians to escape from being trapped in Gaza under Hamas. If Hamas didn't have millions of hostages they wouldn't be nearly so fearsome.
It's simple for them not to be trapped in Gaza. They could leave to Egypt or they could find refuge in other countries. It's inhuman for them to be trapped in Gaza, when there are obviously safer places with more opportunity for them to go to.
Yes but this isn’t what you were questioning- regardless of what can or should be done to give them a safe escape while there isn’t Israel’s gross disregard for civilian lives is unacceptable and is appropriate to call out as Charles has.
Sure, I just personally find it odd to criticize Israel and not Hamas. You speculated that the reason Charles does this was that he's an American, and the USA can influence Israel but we can't influence Hamas. So I explained why I don't think that is true. I still don't see a good reason.
I don't think it's equivocal, either - I think it's clearly biased. Why would you call out one side of the conflict and not the other? People argue about whether Israel's intentions are genocidal, but there's no question that Hamas's intentions are genocidal, right? When I asked the question, Charles simply ignored it. What's your answer to the question?
Thank you for writing this. In psychology one of the most insidious forms of abuse is offending from the victim position. When an entire group of people do this the results are horrific. The U.S. support of this is morally reprehensible.
Since I wrote that post, I have been reminded that most scholars of international politics say nation states do not have morality. As a citizen of one, I wish mine did and find myself yearning for my national government to act morally.
This may be unrealistic. Indeed, the Realists would say so.
I find the Realist employs rather shallow and lazy reasoning. It is self-serving when it comes from one of the powerful elite who make policy. It may remind you of the sophisticated abuser who can give you many reasons why he must be justified in his abuse.
The Realist refuses to accept the responsibility that it is persons who set up and then support the nation state. There is no nation w/o the people, so we are all morally responsible for what the nation does.
Words strung together do not void responsibility for actions. Applies to you, me, Putin, Biden, and Trump.
Indeed it’s what I grapple with daily because when one lives in a democracy (ok technically a republic) we are culpable for the actions of our leaders
Blinne Ne Ghralaigh gave a speech for the ages that must be listened to. She cooly and methodically, step by step, laid out the evidence of genocide. A masterful and totally convincing exposition that will eliminate any doubt that Israel is carrying out a genocide against the Palestinian people.
Thank you for this.
Great piece, and glad to see you writing this!
Why don't you care about what Hamas did to Israelis, or the moral failure of Iran, Qatar, or Turkey in permitting and encouraging Hamas to carry them out? It just seems extraordinarily biased.
You suspect I like Hamas, that violent right-wing political formation? Really? Is it required in your mind that I denounce Hamas before talking about South Africa's case about right-wing Israeli genocide in Gaza. I knew someone, would call for that. And there you are.
Sure, there is always context. Germans felt hurt by the losses following WWI - doesn't excuse in any way genocide against Jews. Israelis were hurt by Hamas - doesn't excuse genocide against Palestinians. Each act is separate and requires moral justifications on its own terms, outside of socially constructive historical narratives. Sure, Palestinians have some really problematic narratives, but so do Israelis, and so does Joe Biden. Listen to the testimony! That is all I ask.
You didn't answer the question. Why do you talk about what Israel does and not about what Hamas did? Maybe you have a good reason I just haven't thought of. But it sure seems you care a lot more about one than the other, just from what you choose to write about. It seems that you are holding them to different moral standards.
It's definitely not "required", it's your forum and you can post whatever you want. But it makes you look bad. You don't seem much like the person I used to know and admire.
I obviously can’t speak for. Charles. For me the difference lives in the fact that I am the citizen of a country that because it’s a democracy makes me as a voting citizen culpable to a degree for its actions. Given the amount of military aid the U.S. is sending to Israel with none of the normal checks on it being used “responsibly” (is there such a thing) then speaking out against this and making others aware of the ICJ findings on Israel is our moral duty.
I think the US could do a lot about Hamas, too. For example, we have a lot of influence with Egypt, which we could use to make them allow innocent civilians to escape from being trapped in Gaza under Hamas. If Hamas didn't have millions of hostages they wouldn't be nearly so fearsome.
It's not that simple as long as Israel refuses Palestinian right to return:
https://www.slowboring.com/p/palestinian-right-of-return-matters?r=pohw0&utm_campaign=post&utm_medium=web
It's simple for them not to be trapped in Gaza. They could leave to Egypt or they could find refuge in other countries. It's inhuman for them to be trapped in Gaza, when there are obviously safer places with more opportunity for them to go to.
Yes but this isn’t what you were questioning- regardless of what can or should be done to give them a safe escape while there isn’t Israel’s gross disregard for civilian lives is unacceptable and is appropriate to call out as Charles has.
Sure, I just personally find it odd to criticize Israel and not Hamas. You speculated that the reason Charles does this was that he's an American, and the USA can influence Israel but we can't influence Hamas. So I explained why I don't think that is true. I still don't see a good reason.
I don’t think it’s equivocal - calling out the humanitarian atrocity of Israel’s response doesn’t ignore or justify what happened on Oct 7.
I don't think it's equivocal, either - I think it's clearly biased. Why would you call out one side of the conflict and not the other? People argue about whether Israel's intentions are genocidal, but there's no question that Hamas's intentions are genocidal, right? When I asked the question, Charles simply ignored it. What's your answer to the question?