Rather than just write something and promptly bury your head in the sand, why not engage in the discourse? Plant a stake and state, unequivocally, the direction your moral beacon points.
"Perhaps the greatest irony of reality today is that the rhetoric of Germany’s 'anti-antisemitism' is being used to justify the mass slaughter of Palestinian people, while having the effect of actually increasing antisemitism and making Jewish people less safe everywhere...
"At what point will the humanitarian crises stop? One hundred and thirty Israeli hostages still in Gaza. Almost 20,000 Palestinian dead. 6,600 of whom are children. More than 50,000 wounded. 2,300,000 starving people. Nine out of 10 Palestinians not eating every day... People are starving."
Never again?
Or never again for no one?
If you believe, as MLK Jr. said, "The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice," then how do you think people who turn their back on genocide will be viewed?
As much as what you're saying should be self-evident, there's another aspect of it that's disconcerting.
There's a strong propensity among some self-professed progressives to make this argument, i.e., the lives of all innocent Israelis and Palestinians matter or, said more succinctly, all lives matter.
Here's the thing:
Spend some time driving around Trump Country. If you do, you'll see plenty of "All Lives Matter" signs, but I suspect many, if not most (or all), of those self-professed progressives who are making the "all lives matter" argument about this conflict would shake their heads at those people in Trump Country (I suppose you could argue that they failed to muster sufficient empathy or willingness to understand why people in Trump country think all lives should and do matter).
As I'm sure you're aware, Black Lives Matter was never a statement that certain people's lives don't matter. It's a statement about an asymmetry of power, the systematic abuse of power, and the denial of basic human rights to and dignity of one group of people by another.
Anyone who can't understand that, who believes that empathy (and progressivism) means that a White Lives Matter placard must be paired with every Black Lives Matter poster, needs to take a long breath, step away from whatever echo chambers they inhabit, and please try to do better.
"But he was also talking directly to the soldiers of Germany, who were carrying out Hitler’s orders."
It's not a direct analogy, but one of the most disheartening aspects has been how unwilling many progressives have been to condemn Netanyahu et al. for their human rights atrocities. The same can also be said of those who support terrorism against innocent people. However, the overwhelming majority of Palestinians do not have the option to resist Hamas, not when they're denied access to basic human rights and face a constant struggle to realize the type of human dignity that most of us take for granted.
I can't help feeling that anything short of full-throated condemnation of democratically-elected Israeli government amounts to tacit support. When a pro-Zionist group pulls out funding for something like the National Book Award because some speakers may use their platform to make a case that, yes, Palestinians also deserve basic human rights, why don't dozens of other progressive organizations step up?
You're absolutely correct that we should mourn for innocents on both sides, but let's not forget that this scenario is one in which there's asymmetric power.
Palestinians are not systematically denying food, water, shelter, basic medical care to Israelis. They have no ability to do that.
As presented, your argument feels a bit like saying we should mourn the small number of whites who died as a result of John Brown's raid on Harpers Ferry. Yes, perhaps they were innocent in some respect, but they were also complicit, if in no other way than their silence, which is tantamount to support, of the suppression of a people and the denial of their basic human rights.
Compassionately and beautifully (as always) written, Jane. The increasing pace of our atrocities feels almost insurmountable.
Rather than just write something and promptly bury your head in the sand, why not engage in the discourse? Plant a stake and state, unequivocally, the direction your moral beacon points.
From: https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2023/dec/18/hannah-arendt-prize-masha-gessen-israel-gaza-essay
"Perhaps the greatest irony of reality today is that the rhetoric of Germany’s 'anti-antisemitism' is being used to justify the mass slaughter of Palestinian people, while having the effect of actually increasing antisemitism and making Jewish people less safe everywhere...
"At what point will the humanitarian crises stop? One hundred and thirty Israeli hostages still in Gaza. Almost 20,000 Palestinian dead. 6,600 of whom are children. More than 50,000 wounded. 2,300,000 starving people. Nine out of 10 Palestinians not eating every day... People are starving."
Never again?
Or never again for no one?
If you believe, as MLK Jr. said, "The arc of the moral universe is long, but it bends toward justice," then how do you think people who turn their back on genocide will be viewed?
From your alma mater:
https://swarthmorephoenix.com/2023/12/14/swarthmore-faculty-on-academic-freedom-and-the-gaza-crisis/
As much as what you're saying should be self-evident, there's another aspect of it that's disconcerting.
There's a strong propensity among some self-professed progressives to make this argument, i.e., the lives of all innocent Israelis and Palestinians matter or, said more succinctly, all lives matter.
Here's the thing:
Spend some time driving around Trump Country. If you do, you'll see plenty of "All Lives Matter" signs, but I suspect many, if not most (or all), of those self-professed progressives who are making the "all lives matter" argument about this conflict would shake their heads at those people in Trump Country (I suppose you could argue that they failed to muster sufficient empathy or willingness to understand why people in Trump country think all lives should and do matter).
As I'm sure you're aware, Black Lives Matter was never a statement that certain people's lives don't matter. It's a statement about an asymmetry of power, the systematic abuse of power, and the denial of basic human rights to and dignity of one group of people by another.
Anyone who can't understand that, who believes that empathy (and progressivism) means that a White Lives Matter placard must be paired with every Black Lives Matter poster, needs to take a long breath, step away from whatever echo chambers they inhabit, and please try to do better.
"But he was also talking directly to the soldiers of Germany, who were carrying out Hitler’s orders."
It's not a direct analogy, but one of the most disheartening aspects has been how unwilling many progressives have been to condemn Netanyahu et al. for their human rights atrocities. The same can also be said of those who support terrorism against innocent people. However, the overwhelming majority of Palestinians do not have the option to resist Hamas, not when they're denied access to basic human rights and face a constant struggle to realize the type of human dignity that most of us take for granted.
I can't help feeling that anything short of full-throated condemnation of democratically-elected Israeli government amounts to tacit support. When a pro-Zionist group pulls out funding for something like the National Book Award because some speakers may use their platform to make a case that, yes, Palestinians also deserve basic human rights, why don't dozens of other progressive organizations step up?
You're absolutely correct that we should mourn for innocents on both sides, but let's not forget that this scenario is one in which there's asymmetric power.
Palestinians are not systematically denying food, water, shelter, basic medical care to Israelis. They have no ability to do that.
As presented, your argument feels a bit like saying we should mourn the small number of whites who died as a result of John Brown's raid on Harpers Ferry. Yes, perhaps they were innocent in some respect, but they were also complicit, if in no other way than their silence, which is tantamount to support, of the suppression of a people and the denial of their basic human rights.
"I mourn for the slain and traumatized innocents, killed by Hamas in Israel.
I mourn for the slain and traumatized innocents, killed by Israel in Palestine."
I see so many people who appear only able to agree with the first of these two lines, when both are so painfully true. Nice work here.