Posts

The Shame Is On Us

Recent actions in Hebron by the right-wing Jewish settlers have brought great disgrace to the nation of Israel and the Jewish people. Simply put, this week showed us the dark side of the union between religion and nationalism. Our religion … Read More

By / December 10, 2008

Recent actions in Hebron by the right-wing Jewish settlers have brought great disgrace to the nation of Israel and the Jewish people. Simply put, this week showed us the dark side of the union between religion and nationalism. Our religion and our nationalism.

The settlers call it a "price tag":  Every time Israeli authorities act against the interest of the settlers, the latter will respond by exacting revenge on nearby Palestinian residence and their property.  Much like Japanese Macaques monkeys who when attacked by a powerful and high-ranking aggressor exact revenge on one of his less powerful family members, the settlers are displacing their frustrations on the Palestinians with the hopes of deterring the Israeli government from taking future actions against them.

But judging by the Bulworthesque response of Prime Minister Olmert, the settlers monkey-like actions have backfired:   

"As a Jew, I’m ashamed of the sights of Jews firing at Arabs in Hebron. I have no other definition for what we saw but a pogrom. We are the sons of a nation which knows what a pogrom is, and I’m saying this after much thought. I have no other way to put it.”

This is not the first time that Olmert has described the actions of settlers in the territories as pogroms. By using the word ‘pogrom’ Olmert joins those who at times see a moral and historical equivalence between violence committed against Jews in the Diaspora, and violence committed by Jews against non-Jews in Israel and the occupied territories. This may seem like a non-issue, but in reality it is an unusual and potent choice of words for a prime minister to use. 

The other interesting disclosure in Olmert’s statement is his admission of shame. Shame is an appropriate response. Shame is an outward directed emotion, it is social and ethical, it means that we feel bad because others see our improper behavior (or those who represent us). But shame needs to be adjoined with another emotion: Guilt. Guilt is internal, it is moral and individualistic, it is our conscience bitchslapping us for actions we know to be wrong. 

We are not guilty and shameful because we pulled the trigger, burned down and smashed people’s property, or cursed and spit in their faces.  No, our guilt is the guilt of the enabler. Our shame is the shame of the idle witness. The hill-top youths may be the out of control monster that Dr. Frankenstein of the Yesha counsel created, yet it is we, everyday Israelis, that supported (directly or indirectly) their experiments and operations. 

Of course shame and guilt have their up side. Aristotle understood shame to be a “quasi virtue”, because there is still a great deal of qualitative difference between the person who acts wrongly and feels shame and one who does not. Likewise, an Ethiopian proverb states: “A man without shame is a man without honor.” To the point that he is sincere, the fact that our Prime Minister is expressing shame is a good thing. It shows that he, and to the extent that Olmert speaks for Israel as a collective, we, care about how we behave and how we are perceived.

One can hope that these feelings don’t just function to make us feel superior to the thugs that perpetuated and supported these crimes, but also wake us from our moral complacency regarding the occupation as a whole.

Tagged with:
  • frankenjew20817

    It surely is disgraceful. I haven’t the slightest idea, Mr. Ben-Yehuda, why there isn’t an anti-Gush Arab-Jewish coalition in Israel, but I may be wrong and there might be one. It didn’t appear on February 10.

  • jer

    Zeevico:

    Presently, the majority of Palestinians are fighting against ‘the
    occupation’ and fighting for self-imposed tyranny. How the latter is
    better than the former is for you to rationalise as you will

     Coming up soon is the holiday of Hannukah, as I’m sure you’re aware. Hannukah celebrates the Jews overthrowing Greek rule, and replacing it with native Jewish Hasmonean rule. As it turned out, the Hasmoneans ended up being just as hated at the Greeks, and just as tyrannical. And yet, we still celebrate Hannukah. Rationalise that as you will.

    Or, realize that the reason the occupation (no scare quotes) is wrong isn’t because it’s depriving the Palestinians of a perfect government, but because it is a bunch of outsiders imposing their power on the Palestinian people, depriving them of their land and their rights, and inflicting violence on them. Theft is wrong, even if the original owner isn’t going to take any better care of the property. Just because I think that Sweden runs a country better than the United States, does not mean I think that Sweden should get to take American land and run America for Americans until such time as America has a government that I think is better. Self-determination is not just for Jews.

  • Ch.44

    Zeevico: I think you ask an intelligent question here:

    What the Palestinians have consistently demonstrated in supporting
    Hamas and Fatah is that they don’t want a secular democratic state.
    Hamas is a bunch of middle class professionals who picked up rifles
    instead of going to work. Fatah are a sad collection of cronies out for
    their own skins, and not much else. But they’re who the Palestinians
    are getting behind right now. That’s what Palestinians want. It’s well
    and good to rail against the evils of the Israeli occupation. But to
    what end? To whose benefit?

     But I think we all know the answer to this quesiton. The founder s
    and advocates of  Israel itself included many many murdering nuts
    (and note just in its modern incarnation!).

    Nearly every state has  been born out of groupings of actors who are violent and who "picked up rifles" or the antecedents to rifles.

     Presently, the majority of Palestinians are fighting against ‘the
    occupation’ and fighting for self-imposed tyranny. How the latter is
    better than the former is for you to rationalise as you will.

     Because the majority of every ethnic group on earth has and will prefer bad govenrment from their own to any occupation

  • Zeevico

    Red Baron: I agree. The High Court made a decision and that decision is the law. It is a shame that Israel is in the situation that it presently finds itself in. 

    Ismail:

    Presently, the majority of Palestinians are fighting against ‘the occupation’ and fighting for self-imposed tyranny. How the latter is better than the former is for you to rationalise as you will.

  • The Red Baron

    I have to say that this article spwaned a lot of interesting debates. One thing that I would like to throw into the convo with everyone is that part of me disagrees with Roi in that we should not pat the IDF on the back for doing thier job and getting rid of these monsters. Just becuase it is someones duty does not mean that it is always done or that it is easy to do. the IDF does not always represent truth or justice but it is all we have that protects us from annhialation, and also it is made up of us, or children and our brothers and sisters, while not a just and perfect army, we should give them credit where ever we can, as it seems to be one of the biggest targets in criticizing Israels exsistance. All I am saying is, that the PM and the IDF did a good job handeling these shameful Jews, and that we as a people should be proud of thier resolve.

  • Herbert Kaine

    As long as the rule of law exists and is adhered to, they’ll be hauled off to prison for their actions …cant wait for Olmert to do some jail time for corruption.

  • Terry

    "The settlers call it a "price tag":  Every time Israeli authorities act
    against the interest of the settlers, the latter will respond by
    exacting revenge on nearby Palestinian residence and their property."

    The settlers’ policy is acutally a good thing, because they’re digging their own grave. As long as the rule of law exists and is adhered to, they’ll be hauled off to prison for their actions – thus reducing their numbers. Anyone who actively carries out the "price tag" policy should be brought to trial and made into a public example.

  • Herbert Kaine

    Obviously, Ismail, this is the best you can do, since you dont have any cogent responses to my arguments. Thanks for being honest

  • Ismail

    Let’s give him a hand, folks!….Mr. Herbert Kaine!  C’mon, give it up for him! Herbert Kaine! Zany, off-the-wall comedy from one of the best! He’ll be here all week, performing more of his surreal observational humor that has become the gold standard of wacky entertainment. Funny, funny stuff! Mr. Herbert Kaine, ladies and gentlemen!

  • Roi Ben-Yehuda

    I just learned something about Japanese Macaques monkeys that I incorporated into the article (second paragraph).  Now some may find this comparison offensive, I just find it an illuminating insight into our nature.       

  • jer

    I love how the proof that Palestinians are warped beyond saving is that their government tortures. Seriously? You…sure you want to make that argument? I guess maybe you want to claim there’s some sort of huge moral difference between torturing your own citizens and torturing "enemy combatants" from foreign lands, but I think it goes the other way; at least the Paletistinians are only supporting someone who will torture THEM.

  • Herbert Kaine

     It the courts are rigged against the settlers and justice is based upon which political party you belong to, then violence may occur. The fact that the expulsion occurred before the courts ascertained ownership of the house is proof of this. The statement below by David Wilder makes the point more eloquently that I can. The real pogrom is the fact that Olmert allows Sderot and Ashkelon to be rocketed without a response, just like the pogroms in Kishinev. I hope Olmert is jailed for corruption, and his family abandons him to move to Paris, where they can party with Suha Arafat, Avram Burg, and perhaps Mohammed Aldura

    Following the expulsion of families from Beit Hashalom in Hebron, during a radio interview with the BBC, I was asked about our future plans. When I responded that the community would continue to purchase property in Hebron, the interviewer asked, "But won’t that just cause more violence?" I answered, "If I bought a home in London and was told that a Jew purchasing on ‘that side of the city’ would cause a violent reaction, how would that be viewed? Probably as anti-Semitism and racism. Why then can’t a Jew buy property in Hebron, just as people purchase homes all over the world?"

    Another common question I’ve had to field from journalists is, "Don’t you think this has all gotten out of control?" My response is quite simple: "Of course it is totally out of control. That’s not the question. The question is who is out of control?" Clearly, in my opinion, those who have lost control are those democratic institutions which are designed to protect citizens from despotic leadership.

    Following purchase of Beit Hashalom for close to $1 million, the Hebron community found itself under attack from numerous sources. Rapidly the question of our legitimate presence in the building made its way to court. The original court decision found enough evidence supporting our claims to prevent immediate eviction. However, harsh restrictions were imposed, including denial to install windows and to hook up to the Hebron municipal electric grid. Only in the middle of a major snowstorm did the defense minister allow installation of windows in the building last winter.

    Due to the political sensitivity of the case, we soon found ourselves opposite a Supreme Court panel hearing the various issues involved. That panel was composed of Supreme Court President Dorit Beinisch and Justices Edmond Levy and Uzi Fogelman. Levy is religious. Following a break in the court hearings, Beinisch changed the panel, removing Levy and Fogelman and replacing them with Justices Ayala Procaccia, who is known to be one of the most left-wing justices on the court, and Salim Joubran, the only Arab on the court. Beinisch, it must be noted, is not known for her right-wing ideological opinions. Two leftist justices and an Arab were left to decide the fate of the Jews living in Beit Hashalom. If that’s not a stacked deck, nothing is. So wrote retired District Court judge Uzi Struzman, calling the court’s final decision blatantly political.

    In that decision, the court ruled that it would not examine the evidence presented, including proof of authentication of the legal sales documents, a video of the seller receiving and counting the money received for the building, and an audio recording of his description of the sale and receipt of the money.

    Attorney-General Menahem Mazuz, when presented with new evidence in the case, specifically the audio cassette, refused to meet with community attorneys or examine the proof of purchase.
    Defense Minister Ehud Barak announced only two weeks ago his intention to legalize all the illegal Beduin construction in the South. Yet he gave the go-ahead to violently expel all residents of the building in the midst of advanced high-level negotiations which would have allowed him to forgo the brutal confrontation.

    These are examples of nothing less than terror – administrative terror, utilized by the highest echelons of the country’s democratic institutions to further their own political beliefs against loyal citizens of the state, in this case, residents of the Hebron Jewish community.

    Following violent reactions to the extremely harsh expulsion, which included use of tear gas and stun grenades, I was asked about "red lines" – and decisions to "cross those red lines." Unfortunately we are presently facing situations where the government is crossing all the red lines that previously existed. The transformation of the judicial system, including the attorney-general and the Supreme Court, into an extended arm of the political arena ends all notions of impartiality or objectivity.

    Hebron residents are often labeled extremists. However nothing could be more extreme than the above-described actions of Mazuz and Beinisch. But due to their positions and political ideologies, their extremism is considered legitimate.

    It should be clear. Hebron’s Jewish community opposes and rejects any and all violence aimed at innocent people, be they Arabs, Jews or anyone else. However it is unthinkable and intolerable that Israel’s top leadership should change the rules in the middle of the game, expecting the other side to play by the old ones, while they play by the new. Such actions, as we have recently witnessed, quite literally push a large segment of the population into a corner with no way out, creating a dangerously volatile situation. Peace may breed peace but by the same token, extremism breeds extremism.

    The real danger to Israeli society is not a few dozen kids throwing rocks while violently and illegitimately being thrown out of a home in Hebron. The true threat to our country is the warping of the fundamental institutions whose presence is supposed to protect the people rather than terrorize them. The decisions made concerning Beit Hashalom were not based upon justice, rather upon pure judicial terror.

    The writer is spokesman of the Jewish community of Hebron.

  • Ismail

    I don’t want to spend a lot of time addressing Zeevico’s comments since they seem to me to be a hijack of Roi’s original post. This is a familiar ploy to those of us accustomed to the misdirections of Zio-flacks.

    This is not the place to correct Zeevico’s jejune misapprehensions about the debates within the Palestinian polity (he seems to think there are none) or his singling out the odious Dahlan as somehow representative of a peculiarly Palestinian tolerance of criminality when unpunished Israeli torturers are free to sip tea in Tel Aviv.    

    But one or two things must be said. First, I totally agree that the Palestinian people deserve better than either Fatah or Hamas. But isn’t it a little unseemly to harp upon the political failures of a besieged people when there is that little matter of a forty-year assault upon them to deal with? Of course, there is great political utility in compulsively reciting the fatuities of Fatah and the excesses of Hamas instead of, you know, stopping the occupation.

    As for Zeevico’s grade-school civics class notions of what happens in "liberal democracies" vis a vis torturers and murderers, he may find Yesh Din’s recent study illuminating. And here I am stretching the definition of "liberal democracy" to include Israel. 

    My main point is that going on about the admitted shortcomings of both Fatah and Hamas while the people they represent are suffering a conspicuously brutal and ongoing occupation reveals an ethical anorexia of disturbing proportions. To boot, it has little to do with Roi’s post except, of course, to distract us from his message. 

    The moral compass I consult does not indicate that the withholding of medicines from infants or the stealing of water from an occupied population is mitigated by that population’s leadership being sub-optimal.

    And what compass do you consult?   

  • Zeevico

    Edit: Never mind the bollocks.

     1. If you’d like to know the difference between a political party in a liberal democratic country and Fatah, I would direct you to an interview with Muhammad Dahlan, one of Fatah’s security chiefs, which is available here: http://www.vanityfair.com/politics/features/2008/04/gaza200804

    What I’d like to direct to your attention in particular is when Muhammad Dahlan–one of Fatah’s big security chiefs–speaks about his soldiers torturing Hamas men. Here’s an excerpt of the article, wherein Dahlan talks about how his security agency, the Preventive Security organisation [one of 14 Fatah organisations built up because Arafat was a paranoid/realist who was convinced that if he broke everyone up into smaller groups no one would try to kill him]. 

    [quote] 

    “Definitely there were some mistakes here and there. But no one person died in Preventive Security. Prisoners got their rights. Bear in mind that I am an ex-detainee of the Israelis’. No one was personally humiliated, and I never killed anyone the way [Hamas is] killing people on a daily basis now.” Dahlan points out that Arafat maintained a labyrinth of security services—14 in all—and says the Preventive Security Service was blamed for abuses perpetrated by other units. 

    [/quote] 

    What I am focusing on here is Fatah’s treatment of Palestinians, because this provides us wtih the best guide of how it treats and will treat Palestinians in the future. So what do we learn from this short quotation by Mr Dahlan?

    2. Fatah tortures Palestinians that oppose them politically.

    3. Fatah blames other parts of Fatah for torturing Palestinians  too much, because it gives the ‘good’ Fatah–the Fatah you can trust, the Fatah that only tortures people a little bit–a bad name.  [Dahlan names only his organisation as one that tortures people less, out of the 14 Fatah security organisations around] In other words, Dahlan is implying that torture is systemic: a common tool used by Fatah to achieve its ends, and a tool to which his particular organisation, the Preventive Security Service, resorts to only by "mistake."

    4. "There were mistakes" among his particular security service organisation, but "prisoners got their rights". "No one died.". Wow. Frankly, I think the only ‘mistake’ he was referring to was letting his idiot soldiers record an audio tape of them torturing a member of Hamas and then screaming slogans praising Dahlan’s leadership. That’s prime leak material if one of them ever feels like earning some extra cash by passing on the information to a journalist.

    5. Let’s contrast that with the situation in liberal democratic countries. In liberal democratic countries, being found guilty of torturing your own citizens is a good way to get arrested and kicked out of office. In liberal democratic countries, being arrested for politcal corruption is the norm, not the exception. In the Palestinian territories, the use of torture among Fatah "activists" is a norm. Dahlan admitted as much in this very quotation.

    6. Now, to return the issue I raised at the beginning of this comment. How are Palestinians treating one another, and why aren’t they getting any better at it? Fatah and Hamas got the largest amount of votes in the last Palestinian election. Voting for Fatah is saying "Torture: It’s A-okay by me!". On the other hand voting for Hamas is saying: "Rabid racism and religous idiocy that will lead us to ruin is fine, so long as these guys aren’t as corrupt as Fatah." And voting for either implies that most  Palestinians (a) don’t want a liberal democratic state and don’t want to support a liberal democratic movement and (b) want a civil war between Hamas and Fatah. 

  • Eyal

    I expect the Israeli law to find these people guilty in two extreme charges: attempt to murder and damage to Israel’s security.   If Israeli law fails in punishing these criminals like it punished Mordechai Vaanunu ("the atom spy") in risking Israel’s security, and finds excuses to “treat” them “forgivingly” -  then this country will not last long.  So please, miserable country, do what you must do this time!  This is essential for your survival!  Let your children be proud of you, as we desperately need it… before it’s too late!

  • jer

    Fuck, sorry bout the double post. I thought it hadn’t gone through, so I hit publish again. Apologies.

  • jer

    I don’t want to speak for Ismail, but presumably, for the benefit of the Palestinians who suffer under the occupation? And even the Israelis, who would have a far better time of things if there could be a peaceful solution to this whole mess? Which would require an end to the occupation? Maybe?

    Also, to dismiss Palestinians for getting behind a "sad collection of cronies out for their own skins" would logically require one to dismiss oh, pretty much every democratic nation in the world as not wanting a secular democratic state. Alas, democracy tends to result in bunches of self-serving cronies looking out for their own good. In Israel, in America, in Canada. Even in Palestine. 

  • jer

    I don’t want to speak for Ismail, but presumably, for the benefit of the Palestinians who suffer under the occupation? And even the Israelis, who would have a far better time of things if there could be a peaceful solution to this whole mess? Which would require an end to the occupation? Maybe?

    Also, to dismiss Palestinians for getting behind a "sad collection of cronies out for their own skins" would logically require one to dismiss oh, pretty much every democratic nation in the world as not wanting a secular democratic state. Alas, democracy tends to result in bunches of self-serving cronies looking out for their own good. In Israel, in America, in Canada. Even in Palestine. 

  • Zeevico

    I feel bound to ask you this, Ismail, because on the one hand you appear to be a democrat [small d], and on the other hand, you have an opinion in this conflict that to me is simply incomprehensible if one is a democrat.

    What the Palestinians have consistently demonstrated in supporting Hamas and Fatah is that they don’t want a secular democratic state. Hamas is a bunch of middle class professionals who picked up rifles instead of going to work. Fatah are a sad collection of cronies out for their own skins, and not much else. But they’re who the Palestinians are getting behind right now. That’s what Palestinians want. It’s well and good to rail against the evils of the Israeli occupation. But to what end? To whose benefit?

  • Ismail

    "Good article, but shouldn’t you also give credit to the israeli government for  removing the settlers in the first place?"

    Not even a teensy, weensy bit. As the last sentence of Roi’s article suggests, there is a danger in patting the collective IDF back for removing these most outlying, extreme representations of Zionist expansionism while normalizing the quotidian crimes of the occupation itself. This is like congratulating ourselves for denouncing lynching while we make sure the house next door is sold only to nice white folks. 

  • dinah

    Good article, but shouldn’t you also give credit to the israeli government for  removing the settlers in the first place?