Posts
The ‘Siege Mentality’ of Discussing Israel
By Kim Chernin / September 15, 2009
I started out by saying that I was worried about us, the whole community of us, American Jews. As Jews, inheriting a Talmudic tradition of debate and commentary, we have been a people given to disputation. We have been considered a stiff-necked, stubborn people precisely because we don’t easily yield our opinions to authority and because our authorities have not felt the need to require of a Jew a rigorous structure of necessary beliefs. You can be a Jew if you believe in God or not, if you are kosher or not, if you are observant or not, if you read or have read the Bible, whether or not you observe the Sabbath and welcome the Shekinah and the extra soul she is said to bring us for the Sabbath. You could even be totally ignorant of any of this and still be a Jew.
So, how does it happen, I ask, with a tradition like this, that we have become a people who can’t tolerate a difference of opinion when it comes to Israel? I’m serious when I say we cannot tolerate it. There are at present thirty-three distinct Jewish organizations formed into a coalition to watch what is said about Israel on college campuses. Yes, yes, I’m perfectly serious. The majority of them are off-campus organizations so concerned about attitudes towards Israel that they have determined to generate on campus a "pro-active, pro-Israel agenda." This does not sound very Jewish to me. It also does not sound much like higher education and that is what worries me. I want to understand why we Jews have begun to behave as if the holding or speaking of an opinion was, in itself, a threat to the survival of Israel.
In a recent article by David Theo Goldberg and Saree Makdisi, I read the following (Tikkun, September/ October, 2009): "We have become increasingly concerned at the ways in which scholarly critics of Israeli policy have been cavalierly and maliciously misrepresented, mostly through ad hominem attacks on their characters, reputations, and careers."
Here is their recent example: The written reports of a panel, "Human Rights and Gaza," hosted at UCLA in January of 2009 have been for the most part misleading. The papers presented by the four speakers were received in an atmosphere of general tolerance, although on one occasion, briefly, they were "interrupted by pro-Israeli jeers." I have checked this account by listening to the podcast of the proceedings. It was a peaceful and civil public event. The reports, however, give a very different impression. It has been compared to a "beer hall political rally," the panelists have been characterized as an "anti-semitic lynch mob." They have been accused of leading a frenzied audience in chants of "F–k Israel" and "Zionism is Nazism." None of this, I repeat, absolutely none of this is accurate, there was no frenzied audience and there were no chants. One of the participants was Richard Falk, the UN Special Rapporteur on Human Rights in the occupied Palestinian territories. Can one really imagine this man as part of an anti-semitic lynch mob?
I encourage anyone interested in this issue to do what I have done and check it out online. Or you can trust me that the occasion was as I have represented it – civil, respectable, entirely appropriate for an academic setting, not the way it has been represented by Roberta Said, education director of Stand With Us, in an article entitled "Reviving 1920′s Munich Beer Halls at UCLA, Courtesy of California Taxpayers." Subsequently, articles in the Wall Street Journal (February 3, 2009), the Jewish Journal of Los Angeles (February 18, 2009) and in The Los Angeles Times use her characterization of the panel and its speakers without bothering to check facts. Could it be that the writers of these articles actually believe what they are saying? That they are so alarmed by a criticism of Israel that they experience it as a deadly attack and then unwittingly invent the mood, the atmosphere and the comments that would justify this assertion?
I have come to think about this as a "siege mentality," a state of mind in which one believes oneself and one’s people to be perpetually under attack, living at an edge where drastic measures are needed for survival. I sense in it a raw, underlying fear of immanent destruction, as if the people who see the world in this way imagine that we Jews are still living through the Holocaust. Munich beer halls, vicious anti-semitic slogans, the fascist-style chanting, all taking place on a University campus in California in 2009? I sense here a serious confusion between past and present and also between acts and thoughts, so that a verbal critique is experienced as a physical attack and then comes to be perceived as a violent action – an escalating confusion between what is said and what takes place in the world.
How unfortunate this is, how tragic that members of our community are so traumatized by the past that they cannot easily join others of us in the present. We are not outcasts and victims any longer; we are a powerful people, we have accomplished a miracle of nationhood. What are these fears and worries that seem to express love and concern and support for Israel? Are they not (although not intended to be) an undeserved insult to the Jewish accomplishment? I see these fears as a heartbreaking failure to recognize what we have in fact achieved. In the world as it is now we have an indisputable fact, which these worriers cannot see: the Jewish people has become powerful.
POST A COMMENT
spurmoralman, best defense is a good offense?
never again means never again for anyone–not never again for us.Â
http://www.ifamericansknew.org
http://www.ijsn.net
Thank you Kim for an insightful article. The belligerent zionist lashback that colors the comments is transparently indicative of the stranglehold the Israel lobby has over American Jewry. So thanks for confirming my suspicion.
Dear Ms. Chernin: Thank you for a sensible and intelligent article. You are absolutely correct. We Jews are a strong people.
Cordially,
Robin Margolis
http://www.half-jewish.net
http://www.inclusivistjudaism.wordpress.com
It’s lower down on the page
What a weird statement. Anything you disagree with, you ignore so that it’s not dissemated further into the discussion of whatever. But on to what I mean.
 I’m the grandchild of survivors. My grandparents, along with being incredibly lucky, didn’t come out with the rest of their family, or the majority of their sanity. So, when they discussed how to be Jewish in the Jesusland that is America, they cautioned me–Don’t be afraid, don’t be timid, don’t be hidden. The best defense to antisemitism is a good offense, I suppose–have the audacity to be vocal and present with who you are, and people will hopefully respect that. It won’t make it a hidden thing. It’ll lead to people asking me questions about Judaism all the time, but whatever. Small price to pay.
I’m also incredibly lucky. I haven’t been too hurt by antisemitism. I get the comments, and the accusations, but no one’s taken an actual shot at me. Yet. And it’s not a situation that I expect to continue–every year, on the high holidays, security guards keep getting bigger and scarier around my temple. Being Jewish is wearing a giant fucking target on your back, especially if you’re a university student. People, where I go to school, have been hospitalized by people who hate Israel. This is the world we live in. It is not, is not, is not safe to be Jewish here.
Except in Israel. Israel is the one case where it’s okay to be Jewish. It’s scary and it’s threatened and it’s difficult, but it’s….different, in some way that’s hard to really describe. Israel is where we can be who we are without fear–well, with a hell of a lot of fear, but a different kind of fear, I guess. Not fear of the majority judging you.
We, as a people, are not safe. We’re not secure. And that’s something we have to live with, and die from. When the world, and I guess by the world I mean the area of it that I walk around and deal with on a regular basis, stops targeting Jews, stops attacking Jews, stops doing the same damned thing that it’s done since the beginning of time, then I’ll feel safe. I’ll feel secure. I won’t really need the homeland. But that hasn’t happened yet.
 So that’s what I mean.
what not biting, not even "Pick one, ANY one (or 100 for that matter) points of historical inaccuracies"? shame I was actually looking forward to that, but I shouldn’t be surprised should I, I mean what were you to do openly discuss/trade fact for fact?
good luck with that anyway.
Paul
- Peace through Superior Firepower
- The Greatest Form of Defence is Offence
- NEVER AGAIN
Kim, I appreciate your post. Â Thank you for giving voice to something that frustrates and saddens so many of us. Â
Paul, as soon as I see "antisemite" in my adversary’s argument, I know the conversation’s over. You will not find a single iota of a particle of a scintilla of antisemitism in anything I’ve ever said-I invite you to show otherwise.
What you will find is a powerful dislike of zionism, or at least the form zionism has taken in the Levant, and a profound denunciation of Israel’s policies there.
If this is equivalent to antisemitism in your eyes, then we have nothing to talk about. If not, please go on with a specific argument.
As I say, I have deep disagreements with many on this site, but most of them actually have something to say, unlike, it appears, you.
When you have a particular point to make, and you can do so without attributing bigotry to me on the evidence of nothing at all, please do so. If not, please go ahead and munch your popcorn while watching your historical research on video. I’ll pass.Â
"Not sure why spurmoralman dedicated his vacuous collection of generalities to me"
-Ismail in this instance you’re right (bet you don’t hear that very often!!) I did incorrectly add your details to the subject line, be that as it may you’ve asked for some examples of your short-sighted, anti-Semitic, bigoted type statements so I am happy to oblige. Oh and vacuous- I wont even dignify that with a comment. Your attempts to insult me etc is far more telling about you than it ever could about me, so I’ll leave you to dig your own grave (your kind usually does after not too long) you don’t need any help from me! Now to some issues…
You said:
1. If I understand him correctly, he seems to accusing me of the horrible crime of actually believing my analysis of events in the Middle East to be true. Imagine!
A. Once again Ismail your powers of comprehension never cease to amaze and yes if you do believe your own analysis of events in the Middle East then without putting too finer word on it, you are more than likely a liar and or delusional or both- seek help. Here’s a tip to get you on the straight and narrow- look at archival footage, documentation and fact that’ll pretty soon set you straight.
What was that I heard you say?
"Oh that’s all Jewish subversion shit that’s been put on the net to alter the truth about history… the Jews do that you know, ALL THE TIME! You know they eat children don’t you?"
-Yes, yes once again you are right (can’t compete with a total anti-Semite especially one who’s paranoia and psychosis has altered their perception of reality to such an extent that they couldn’t see a fact if it bit them on the face.)
You said:
2. Peace camp? Thanks, but I’ll take the boycott, divestment and sanction camp, if you please. Israelis who realize that their government must be shocked into change are my pals
A. Good idea! Heaven forbid you would want to go down the route of peace, education and friendship.
You said:
I am in complete agreement with your final statement, of course ( "there is only ever one truth and one factual account and it behoves everyone to seek out that truth and disseminate it if there is a misrepresentation of that truth."), but this is useless without particulars.
A. Pick one, ANY one (or 100 for that matter) points of historical inaccuracies as you see it and I will be more than happy to debate these issues with you thoroughly. *see point #1
You said:
One final note: your charming trio of taglines ("peace through superior firepower" et al) is missing the most important one of all:
"Ignorance is Strength"
A. Yep your right again (thank G-D it’s the Arabs!! ;) keep on with that maxim and you’ll do great- it’s worked out well for you so far!! Silly Jews, imagine being known as the people of the book, the learned ones, boy have they ever got it wrong! Doh! Nargile anyone?
Paul
- Peace through Superior Firepower
- The Greatest Form of Defence is Offence
- NEVER AGAIN
Not sure why spurmoralman dedicated his vacuous collection of generalities to me, but since he did, let me say that I am happy to respond, as long as he offers a particular or two for me to respond to.Â
If I understand him correctly, he seems to accusing me of the horrible crime of actually believing my analysis of events in the Middle East to be true. Imagine!
Spur, there are some heavy hitters at this site. Each of them does a better job of trying to whitewash Israel’s crimes than your piece here does. You’ll have to step up your game.
You might, for example, do wonders for your credibility if you didn’t just "watch" dersh’s little bit of agitprop. There is a book, you know, with footnotes and stuff. Much more impressive to have read and checked his sources instead of simply taking in his lies with your popcorn.
I am in complete agreement with your final statement, of course ( "there is only ever one truth and one factual account and it behoves everyone to seek out that truth and disseminate it if there is a misrepresentation of that truth."), but this  is useless without particulars.
One final note: your charming trio of taglines ("peace through superior firepower" et al) is missing the most important one of all:
"Ignorance is Strength"Â
Â
I’ve just watched "The Case for Israel" by Alan Dershowitz (excellent btw) and I’d like to quote something he said which we all know instinctively to be true but sometimes some of us forget or even come to believe their own (or others) arguments as being gospel when it clearly is not.
What he said was: "there is a Palestinian narrative and Israeli’s must know the Palestinian narrative and there is an Israeli narrative and the narratives don’t often join together but there’s also a truthful narrative". This lead to the program going back to look at archival footage, documentation and fact- an idea that is continually misrepresented or totally ignored by those that seek to demonise Israel or to promote their own agendas, political beliefs or anti-Semitism. Unfortunately as we know this is not just done by the odd wayward individual on someone’s blog it’s also practised routinely by the world’s impartial media-
1) which directly overrides their own stated objectives of professional journalism. The Society of Professional Journalists (a single representative body picked for expediency) has a very clear policy on this matter.
see: http://www.spj.org/ethicscode.aspÂ
2) it intentionally tries to mislead its own readers/ viewers/ listeners- I make this point not only because of the previous/logical reasoning as in the point above but to differentiate it because I make the assumption that these readers/ viewers/ listeners seek the truth in their news and not some fabricated agenda driven nonsense.
3) it also constitutes a crime- in my country at least (thank G-D for Australia!!) i.e. The Racial Vilification Laws
see: http://www.hreoc.gov.au/racial_discrimination/cyberracism/vilification.html
So at the end of the day (and this post :) what message am I trying to elucidate… there is only ever one truth and one factual account and it behoves everyone to seek out that truth and disseminate it if there is a misrepresentation of that truth.
Paul
- Peace through Superior Firepower
- The Greatest Form of Defence is Offence
- NEVER AGAIN
I normally wouldn’t entertain the idea of giving someone who’s opinion I believe is suspect to begin with a forum to further espouse their views but in this case for some reason I wanted to know what you meant by your comment: "When they stop trying to kill us", would you care to elaborate further?
Paul
- Peace through Superior Firepower
- The Greatest Form of Defence is Offense
- NEVER AGAIN
but out of all the Jewish achievements in this world, safety still isn’t one of them. When they stop trying to kill us, I’ll feel secure.
Yes we Jewish people have so much to be proud of & yes we have contributed to the world’s development in far higher percentages than any other people on earth, but is the siege mentality warranted, I personally believe it is. The Jewish people have only had one history and sadly that history is of persecution. Whether it was 2000 years ago or yesterday the world continues to demonise and castigate the Jewish people in every forum possible, so the idea that we can now collectively "rest" and rely on our laurels is IMHO ludicrous and without a doubt dangerous. The saying attributed to Georges Santayana i.e. "those who do not study history are doomed to repeat it" are for me anyway never far from my mind and you don’t have to be Einstein :) to see history repeating itself day after day in ever increasing frequency, moral decay and in the case of Iran, the greatest threat since the Shoah to the Jewish people as a whole.
Paul
- Peace through Superior Firepower
- The Greatest Form of Defence is Offense
- NEVER AGAIN
"I’ll give in to Ismail’s need to be called out for what he says some other time."
Ok, I’ll be patient. In the meantime, shana tovah to you.Â
It’s a holiday.
I’ll give in to Ismail’s need to be called out for what he says some other time.Â
Ismail, the unwillingness of the anti-Zionist camp to blame the Arab governments for any  share of Palestinian troubles, especially the fostering of the Nakba cult in order to anatagonise Israel, and a demonstrable lack of support for actuall Palestinian self-determination (except at Israel’s expence) weakens their argument. The blatant avoidance of historical fact makes their grievances look Jew-specific.
The anti-Zionists only have a problem with Jewish "misdeeds" against Palestinian Arabs. They don’t even pay lip service to the actions of other nations against the Arabs in Palestine. I guess Hashemite bullets make people less dead than Israeli bullets. Or perhaps Egypt’s blockade of Gaza was less restrictive than the one by Israel? Â
By the way, has any Arab governement sent any money, resources, professional help to advance Fayyad’s de-facto state plan? That’s what I thought….Damascus, Rhyad, Amman and Cairo don’t have any use for a stable Arab state in Palestine. They already have at least 3……….
The reliably nutty Isaac offers the following as a condensation of my remarks:
"Thou shalt absolve the Jewish people of being the principal authors of the world’s problems but nottheir government."
I of course would never in a million years describe the goniffs and bullyboys who run Israel as the "government of the Jewish people", so (surprise!), our little friend is once again confabulating like a three year old.
Actually, can I get a show of hands? How many here would describe Bibi and his motley henchmen as the government of the Jewish people? Not the Israeli people, but the Jewish people. How many Jews reading this in the diaspora, who hold citizenship in the US or UK or anywhere but Israel, think of the Bibi’s crew as "my gov’t"? Â Â
"It has destroyed the credibility of the peace camp…"
Given that Israeli settlement activity flourished during the salad days of the "peace camp", I’d say that the Palestinians have lost nothing by those folks having shuffled offstage. Happy talk from Labor governments helped to conceal Israel’s underlying rapaciousness; sadly, it has taken the criminal assault on Gaza and Bibi’s unvarnished enthusiasm for rejectionism to shift world opinion re Israel, whose rogue behavior is becoming less and less tolerable to civilized nations-witness the almost daily announcements of boycotts, divestments etc from major economic players.
Kim Chernin seems to have her heart in the right place, and I’m happy that she has begun educating herself about the history of the Levant, but I’m always wary of the "there’s no truth, only different narratives" disposition. It’s fine to maintain a open ear and to try and understand your interlocutor’s take on reality. But sometimes your interlocutor is wrong, plain and simple.
On the level of the individual, I am very curious about the experience of this Israeli or that American Zionist. On the level of the political, though, I couldn’t care less. And this is why I am skeptical about-no, opposed to- such efforts as those silly summer camps for Arab and Israeli children. Let them learn about one another as human beings, the theory goes, as though political change were like a therapy group, as though the main problem were an individual, psychological one, rather than one about power, resources, influence-you know, a political problem.
Peace camp? Thanks, but I’ll take the boycott, divestment and sanction camp, if you please. Israelis who realize that their government must be shocked into change are my pals; those who are happy to simply tsk-tsk for another forty years, not so much. Â
 Â
Boy, the author comes off as a bit condescending here. She’s accusing ‘Zionist hawks’ of being haughty and selectively outraged, and yet she’s doing the same thing. I have to honestly ask how much time the author has spent researching this subject, because she’s coming across as dilettantish. In her initial article she seems to say that she hasn’t been paying close attention to the situation in Israel for the last few decades. So, I wonder when exactly she started paying attention again.Â
It’s not hard to find a few articles on line that exaggerate a situation as allegedly happened over the UCLA "Siege in Gaza" symposium. But there are plenty of examples that are not exaggerated. I touched on my own learning arc of the IP conflict in the other thread. I still define myself as a slightly left of center secularist who self identifies with Labor over Likud everytime. I’ve been paying close attention to this conflict ever since I first got hooked up with the internet in late ’99. What I’ve seen has led me to become one of the ‘paranoid’ people.
I don’t feel like elaborating right now though, because I have a hunch the author of this thread isn’t going to pay attention either way. While as a 30 year old woman she went to Israel and was able to enjoy her time there with an uncomplicated view of the IDF as perfect and all Palestinians as terrorists, I was never quite that naive. Even then I appreciated that things were never that simple. So, now that thirty odd years later she’s done a volte face, perhaps she’s still just as naive and is simply overreacting in the other direction.
The last ten years have been very sobering for me, and also very exciting and educational. There are a lot of resources out there on line on this subject, and over a period of years you get to understand both the strong and the subtle biases associated with various sources, and you can form your own opinion based on having a wide variety of sources.
Before adjudging whether Zionists are simply being paranoid because they feel threatened, at the very least one should extensively review both the rise and the fall of the Oslo Accords. Without doing at least that, a meaningful discussion is impossible. Â
For someone who has been out of the loop for thirty years and only recently became interested again, it may indeed seem like the right wing voices in Zionism are disturbingly strong. But it helps to understand that in the 90s, the right wing was in the doghouse, especially after Rabin was shot. The ‘center left’ was ascendant during these years. And then when Israelis saw how the Arab world reacted with the Al Aqsa Intifada, the hopeful but sensible Israelis abandoned the peace camp. It wasn’t even a conscious act of abandonment, it was a normal reaction to a very rude awakening.
Launching an intifada against Israel, and against worldwide Zionism, has its consequences. The Arab actions of the 2000s as well as the ‘international community’s’ proclamations, have been a godsend to the settlers and the far right. Â It has destroyed the credibility of the peace camp, splitting them into moderates and the hard left. In these polarized times the hard left may be enjoying celebrity status in Europe and at campuses in the USA, but they’re marginalized among Israelis and more sober minded Zionists (as opposed to dilettantes).Â
If you really want to learn, enjoy–there is a lot of information out there. However, if this is another Bay Area ‘let’s talk about our feelings’ exercise, please understand that it’s about as relevant as a high school politics club.Â
Ismail, so now we’re talking about "unhappiness"? I think that the Serb irridentists (Karadzhic, Milocevic…) were very "unhappy" that Bosnian Muslims decided to not belong to Serbia anymore. Does that mean that the forces of Rpublika Serpska were justified in killing those Muslims? You suggest a flimsy standard.
Perhaps the Palestinian Arabs are the greatest vexation of the region. All the Arab governments plus Israel (and even reformists in Iran)Â seem to think so….
 I am really quite tired of presenting the same evidence countless times. The Palestinian Arabs did not see any other "occupation" of Palestine as a threat to their identity. Not the Ottomans, not the British, not Hashemite Jordan, not Nassarist Egypt. Jews for some reason, Jews and not the Zionist state, seem to inspire some special consternation.
No Zionist state existed in the early decades of the 1900s when Jews where expelled from Hebron and killed in Mufti of Jerusalem-inspired pogroms. They were a minority insignificant in both number and political, economic influence.
Were the UK colonizers so similar in culture to the Palestinian Arabs that their dominance did not herald "sociocide" where the Jewish presence in Hebron did?
To continue the point of my original post: Crimes against Jews in Britain doubled after Cast Lead. Are Jews in Britain responsible for the actions of the Zionist government? Why is no-one in the anti-Zionist movement marching?
"Thou shalt absolve the Jewish people of being the principal authors of the world’s problems but not their government."
"Thou shalt absolve both the Arabs and their governments of being the principal authors of the world’s problems."Â
Ethnocentrism 101, Ismail-style.
And what’s his reasoning? Because Jews maintain the unfortunate distinction of having their own religion – one that aroused hatred, marginalization and abuse (and that’s just on a good day) by the religion of Ismail’s family over the generations – they, as a people, are to be denied the organs of statehood.
Ismail claims this is a philosophical matter related to a secularism that he isn’t much troubled by when violated even more egregiously by the likes of Hamas.Â
For that matter, he doesn’t seem troubled by the fact that the country of Japan is comprised of a people with their own religion – Japanese Shintos.Â
What about the Armenians? They also have their own church, do they not?
Is that the cause of whatever disputes they’ve had with the Azeris? Is/was that the "main obstacle" to a peaceful resolution to the disputes between those two peoples?
You hate the fact that the Jews are an anomaly to you by virtue of having their own religion in addition to being a distinct, identifiable ethnocultural group. It makes you insane and you will seek a thousand ways to try to amalgamate them into a utopian definition of humanity that denies the existence of nationalism – at least for them, if for no one else. But you will still fail to do that.Â
And yet, you will never miss an opportunity to proclaim how special and distinct the Palestinian people are. So much so that you use an invented term to describe what you see as an external and wholly malign threat to their apparently unique cultural existence: sociocide.Â
Whoever taught you, taught you well. To dissimulate, that is.Â
You practice a more intense form of cognitive dissonance than that utilized by the armies of idiots who were raised up to march on Washington by the likes of Glenn Beck.Â
"Jews everywhere should take care that we are not once again pointed to as the main obstacle to world welfare."
 Note Brother Fishman’s mention of "Jews" when what we’re talking about is "the Zionist regime". No one respectable is saying that Jews are the main obstacle to world welfare, and I will happily stand alongside Fishman in denouncing those who propose such a stupid declaration.
The Israeli regime, however, is undoubtedly the principal author of Mideastern unhappiness, no doubt about it. Not Hezbollah, et al, but Israel.
You could look it up. Â
The author’s article draws a harrowing parallel between the state of Jews in Weimar Germany and in today’s America/Europe. They too were convinced that they were powerful, and just after WW I, when German Jews fought bravely for their Fatherland, they perceived themselves as model Germans. Then came the poster hanger from Austria and suddenly all the power was gone.
Read the comments from Americans on Haartez articles about Madoff, and suddenly Sholom Aleichem stories float to the surface of the American Jewish consciousness because no matter how amicable the Simpson’s children are with Krusty the Clown (Hershel Krustovsky) he is still an odd-ball with a Rabbi father. And odd-balls make for great targets.
Take the settlers. They are perceived as the MAIN obstacle to Middle Eastern peace.Not Hamas, Hezbollah, Iran and the Arab governments who for 61 years kept their Palestinian brethren in refugee camps. No, its the settlers! Â
Jews everywhere should take care that we are not once again pointed to as the main obstacle to world welfare. The powers that be will not be encumbered by unoriginality.
Wanna post your own comments? Gotta log in first!