It's all so simple, so black-and-white. Everything fits neatly into a precooked view of the world. And those pesky things that don't, simply get ignored or dismissed.
Everything is crystal-clear. Either you're with us or against us, friend or foe, ally or adversary. There's no third way.
And the debating technique is so alluring. No need to respect the norms of civility. No requirement to pay heed to other points of view.
After all, the other side has been declared the enemy - and that means anything goes. Get personal. Question motives. Use name-calling. Demonize. Twist the truth. Go for the jugular. Remember that all's fair in love and war.
This is the situation we're increasingly facing on Israel policy today. Two narratives have taken hold and, especially thanks to cyberspace, have a very long reach.
One narrative has it that the Jewish world is divided in two - those for peace and those against it.
Those for peace, enlightened souls all, think it's actually quite simple: The main obstacle today is posed by Israel and its blind supporters. If only that country weren't so obsessed with security, history, faith, and identity, and saw the light, peace would magically dawn.
But no, the narrative continues, the warmongers, neocons, and peace-resisters just can't seem to get the Holocaust, Hamas, Hezbollah, and Iran out of their minds. How unfortunate! And how retrograde to be obsessed with land in our post-modern world. Why do they keep raising the straw-man arguments about Israel's narrow borders, the vulnerability of Israel's one international airport, or Palestinian incitement?
For these virtuous individuals who believe that they aspire to peace more than the people of Israel -- who, by contrast, presumably would much prefer another 60 years of conflict and bloodshed -- it's all so simple: The Arab world wants peace, Israel is fearful of it, and only the United States can deliver it, if need be by cajoling or arm-twisting Jerusalem.
There is a mirror image of this view among right-wing ideologues, who have their own airtight, smug, and self-satisfying view of the world.
Not only is Israel surrounded by implacable enemies, they say, who have no interest in peace and will never recognize Israel's legitimacy as a Jewish state, but also there's also a new enemy in town - the Obama administration.
From this perspective, the President himself is, variously, a closet Muslim, a foreign-born citizen who has no right to sit in the Oval Office, an anti-Semite, and a disciple of Edward Said and Rashid Khalidi. His goal is to end the special link between the United States and Israel, kowtow to the Muslim world, and feed Israel to the wolves. In doing all this, he allegedly counts on the blind allegiance of a majority of American Jews to the Democratic Party, who will vote for the ticket come what may because their self-styled liberalism trumps any other consideration.
For this group, anyone who dares suggest that the Arab world today is a bit more complicated, and the picture in Washington not quite as cut-and-dried, runs the risk of being labeled traitorous, appeasing, and sycophantic.
What's deliciously ironic is how both sides in this polarized debate use precisely the same tactics. They don't allow for doubt; they demonize anyone who disagrees with them; and they're fast and loose when it comes to the facts. Protest though they might, they're actually two sides of the same coin.
I know. AJC, which adamantly refuses to join either ideological camp, has been targeted by both sides, especially since the advent of the Obama administration 16 months ago.
The right first went after us with a two-by-four for daring to cooperate with the new Washington team in determining the U.S. position on the Durban Review Conference, otherwise known as Durban II. The language used against us was quite grotesque.
We were accused of being Obama's lackeys and selling Israel's birthright down the river in the process. In reality, of course, we did nothing of the sort.
After the five-person review process in which we were involved completed its work, the Obama administration made the right decision and skipped Durban II. But ideologues being ideologues, they couldn't bring themselves to acknowledge the American step, much less, heaven forbid, apologize to us for their out-of-place language.
Then the left went after us with equal vehemence. Our sins included daring to stand up for Israel's right to defend itself and for impugning the motives of those, like Justice Richard Goldstone and the UN Human Rights Council, whose approach was totally one-sided, even libelous; and, to boot, for voicing concern about the U.S. decision to go public in its spat with an ally, Israel.
Meanwhile, doctrinal party hacks find it irrelevant that we support a two-state solution and have for years, that we have more extensive ties in the Arab world than any other Jewish group, that we helped pioneer Muslim-Jewish dialogue, and that we have expressed concern about settlement activity in the West Bank. But it's all-or-nothing for the ideologues, who consider nuance on our part not an asset, but a liability, a means to confuse and distract.
Yes, in a way I envy those who live in their self-constructed bubble for the simplicity of their lives. No agonizing for them, no weighing of alternatives. But envy sure doesn't translate into admiration. The real world of public policy is usually about complexity, difficult choices, and more than a dose of uncertainty.
In other words, it lends itself to humility -- a word that's strikingly absent from the ideologues' lexicon -- not hubris. After all, the fate of more than seven million Israelis hangs in the balance.
I wish everyone would take a look and listen to the above. A balanced discussion of the region that resonates with humanity and hope.
And a special thanks for the comment that "...(Obama) allegedly counts on the blind allegiance of a majority of American Jews to the Democratic Party, who will vote for the ticket come what may because their self-styled liberalism trumps any other consideration."
Take away the word "allegedly", and you pretty much have the story of President Obama's relationship with Jewish voters.
There are some Israelis and the rest of the world, except Burma and Indian Hindi fanatics that want peace.
And their are Israeli and US arms merchants along with settlers who want to keep the pot boiling.
Which side are you on?
It's the only way he could present this article with a straight face.
Thus, they are not in a position to do anything but demonize.
America: The Silence of a Nation.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=MQWUbPN4ooM&feature=player_embedded#!
Yeah. I know. In my dreams.
After reading these post, it seems that too many people who don't have the proverbial dog in this fight are fond of insulting those who aren't in complete agreement with them. It seems that these people also tend to expect those who do have a dog in this fight to ignore the past, let bygones be bygones and give peace a chance. Can anyone see the irony in that?
Fanned.
"Israel denies US academic Chomsky West Bank entry "
http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/middle_east/8685930.stm
"I don't know exactly where the final borders of any peace deal will be drawn, should the Palestinians, after more than six decades of the politics of "no," eventually embrace Israel's outstretched hand of peace. I do know that the Western Wall will always be part of the State of Israel. It couldn't be any other way."
It's all the Palestinians' fault, Israel's outstretched hand for peace, and no compromise on Jerusalem. No ideology here, no siree!
It does seem that David Harris is more of a partisan than an ideologue. There is a difference.
Those sort of creative interpretations work well in PR campaigns and in self-deception, but when they are trotted out in court, get shot down.
Hidden history without the spin or guilt.
http://lawrenceofcyberia.blogs.com/news/2010/03/palestinians-made-the-desert-bloom.html
is a great site of old photos and stories telling what Palestine was before, during and after the creation of Israel.
btw, I can't get the text of your article to load. Tried a couple different ways.