PSA

[sabotabby]

If you believe that the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and sundry conflicts throughout the Middle East, will never be solved while current political and economic structures are intact, then I think you're likely right.

If you believe that said conflicts will not be resolved because you are the sort of curmudgeon who believes that people will always be fighting for some reason in one part of the world or another, then I disagree with you, but I'll shrug it off and not think any less of you for being cynical. I like cynics—I am one, at times—but if I didn't think a better world was possible, I'd have to pretty much give up, y'know?

If, however, you believe any of the following:

• there is something different about people in the Middle East that makes them fight more than people elsewhere, either because of a genetic factor or because of deeply rooted cultural values;

• Jews and Arabs have never gotten along and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been going on since the beginning of time and they never will get along because of something moronic written in some book somewhere;

• the ones who want to fight should be put on an island somewhere where they can duke it out and everyone else will shrug their shoulders and go on with their lives, and furthermore you are very clever for coming up with this solution all by yourself;

• "they" don't want peace;

• a resolution will only be reached once one population is deported or slaughtered; or

• the only way there will ever be peace in the Middle East is if a) the desert is turned to glass, b) the desert is turned into a parking lot, or c) someone drops a giant fifth-dimensional alien squid on a heavily populated area;

then really, you are an idiot, you lack historical perspective, and you are a racist schmuck. I got over that "turn the desert to glass" bullshit in high school at around the same time I got over Ayn Rand. It's basically the fascist end of the liberal "a plague on both their houses/cycle of violence" mentality and is just as absurd. The only reasons to think that you're living at the end of history are because you have an ego problem or are heavily invested in your own apathy, or both.

Yeah, just braid my hair and call me Pollyanna, motherfuckers. This too shall pass.

Comments

[kappsgurl.livejournal.com]

I don't know much about it to be honest. I'll blame it on me being lazy, but everything I've seen in the news seems pro-Israel. I'd be genuinely interested in a blog from you where you lay out the best solution in a sabotabby world.

[sabotabby]

Well, my best possible solution would be worldwide socialism. :) Short of that, I believe the most just solution is one secular state with constitutional provisions in place to guard against any one ethnic group getting too much power. It's not the sort of thing that I expect to see in my lifetime, though it's a possibility, since the fragmentation of Palestinian territory has eliminated the possibility of the classic realistic solution (which is a return to the 1948 UN-established partition plan or some variation thereof).

But I'm not arrogant enough to think I get to decide these things. I'm a Jew living in Canada, and I have the privilege to turn my back tomorrow and pretend none of this shit is happening. It's up to the people living there to develop a workable solution. Western interference so far has only caused a clusterfuck.

[sadie-sabot.livejournal.com]

one secular, democratic state, as a homeland for both jews and for palestinians.

sigh.

yeah.

and yeah, also, to, not being the ones who decide. but we do get to have an opinon!

[livingfossil.livejournal.com]

What if I believe that carpet bombing neighborhoods should be tried at show trial?

[sabotabby]

Perfectly acceptable.

[livingfossil.livejournal.com]

What if I think that war criminals need not be tried--the resources are better spent on education--but rather should be summarily shot? Watching the last few weeks unfold in the mid east has soured the lovingkindness I held for the Israeli state (and it wasn't that sweet to begin with).

[sabotabby]

Do show trials really cost that much? I mean, you could sink the expense into the art and culture budget, turn said trials into cheap entertainment, and use the proceeds to rebuild the shattered Palestinian economy.

[livingfossil.livejournal.com]

I like this idea. It's forward thinking. And besides, watching show trials would give me something else to do in the wee hours.

[rojonoir.livejournal.com]

I just finished watching Blackpool, and right now, I would love to see some show trials with show tunes.

[ironed_orchid]

Everybody wins!

[terry-terrible.livejournal.com]

Why waste time with a trial? :)

[jenlight.livejournal.com]

I <3 U.

[sabotabby]

I get fiery right before bed sometimes.

I <3 the cute puppy thing you posted, by the way.

[jenlight.livejournal.com]

John Green is pretty awesome. I think you'd like him sort of. He can get a bit centrist on some issues, but I allow it since he is kind of adorable.

[sabotabby]

He is wrong about a great deal, making most of the same mistakes that liberals tend to make, but the puppy balances it out.

[dagibbs.livejournal.com]

I grew up through the cold war. For much of that time there were quite good reasons to believe that I was living at the end of history. I no longer believe that to be the case, but I don't think it is or was an ego problem. I think it was a not unreasonable evaluation of the world -- I felt the odds were stacked against me making it to my thirties.

[sabotabby]

I think that's different. When each side has the capacity to not only obliterate each other, but obliterate the entire world several times over, it's logical to assume that the conflict can lead to the end of the human race, and therefore history. But the "end of history" meme wasn't common until after the Cold War. And while the Israelis have nukes, I don't think they brought enough for the whole class, fortunately.

[dagibbs.livejournal.com]

True, and the US and Russia are not at the hair-trigger level they were during the cold war such that if Israel set off their small set of nukes that it would trigger the big bang. And, hopefully, we'll never get back to that place.

[terry-terrible.livejournal.com]

Actually, in the 1973 war if it came down to that the Israelis had a plan to do just that do just that if it looked like they were going to be overrun.

More underestimation of the power of moronic things written in some book somewhere.

[fr-defenestrato.livejournal.com]

I think you're mistaken. Plenty of people believe(d) before, during, and since the so-called 'Cold War' that we are living in the 'end times'. See Hal Lindsey, The Late, Great Planet Earth, a bestseller in the 1970s, and the Left Behind series of the last decade or so. This is just one brand of eschatology based on moronic things written in some books somewhere. Against that backdrop, even secular fears of world destruction were exacerbated throughout the 20th century as humans became absolutely capable of destroying, if not all life on earth, at least all the megafauna. Bunches of people with weak or questioning faith in the dominant religious belief systems started saying to theyselves, Selves, lookie-look at thumthar gubmints trying to git us all blowed up; ain't that look like what that John guy said in his Rebelatiums? I better git me to church!

And, to be precise about your original grousing, you didn't ask your hypothetical reader whether she believed she was 'living at the end of history'; rather, you made all your bullet points and THEN said You're a big dummyhead: 'The only reasons to think that you're living at the end of history are because you have an ego problem or are heavily invested in your own apathy, or both.' Well, no. You've left out the major reason people believe in the end of days, viz.: God done tol' me so. Plus, the beliefs expressed in your bullet points, I would submit, are not even remotely predicated on eschatological beliefs.

Now, by and large I agree that the viewpoints you protest in those bullet points are reprehensible (with the one minor quibble I've already made in comment to the original post). But, frankly, I've not seen anything in popular writing that supports the existence of a post-Cold War 'end of history meme' apart from the aforementioned eschatologies, which clearly predate the Cold War. I'm interested to know where/how you've formed your take on the folk derivation of 'glass the desert' attitudes.

Religion is an ego problem

[flintultrasparc.livejournal.com]

However, at the center of "God done tol' me so" and many religious beliefs is a very strong egoism that believes in the immortality of the human soul. It's horribly narcissistic. Religion, by and large, is an ego problem. The id has better things to do.

The "end of history" meme post cold war, I think is usally a reference to Fukuyama; and really doesn't have much to do with the apocalypse; so much as regarding the struggle between capitalism and socialism is over--and now all remaining conflicts will be ethnic and religious. Fukuyama went from declaring victory of Western Liberal Democracy (Israel fits in there somewhere) to being a neo-conservative supporter of the U.S. invasion of Iraq, to then breaking with the neocons and voting Obama. He now believes: "War is the wrong metaphor for the broader struggle, since wars are fought at full intensity and have clear beginnings and endings. Meeting the jihadist challenge is more of a "long, twilight struggle" whose core is not a military campaign but a political contest for the hearts and minds of ordinary Muslims around the world." Frankly, I don't know why anyone listens to him, but his rhetoric seems to resonate with whoever is currently ruling (or going to rule) the U.S.

Anyway, Fukuyama's an opponent of posthumanity/transhumanity; but I'm sure he'll be enough of a hypocrite to embrace life longevity technology so I'll probably be hating on him for centuries to come. To bring this back to the topic, given advances in longevity medicine--I plan on living a very long time. If that's the case, I'm planning on seeing peace in the middle east--atleast for awhile.

Re: Religion is an ego problem

[fr-defenestrato.livejournal.com]

Wow: by virtue of having been living in a cave at the bottom of the ocean—or so it would seem—I was unaware of Mr. Fukuyama and his claim to the phrase 'end of history'.

As you point out, however, history's obsolescence in the Fukuyaman sense has nothing to do with eschatology. As I understand it, Mr. Fukuyama has cried 'We have a winner!' in the global ideological tournée, a sort of Political Ideology to End All Political Ideologies: liberal democracy at the top of the food chain. Which, setting aside all assumed niceties about his theories, about which I know nothing, sounds like utter kindergarten bullshit to me. Even humans and lions and sharks get viri and bacterial infections, and 'In [Our Posthuman Future: Consequences of the Biotechnology Revolution], he qualified [ed: hedges? you did say hedges, right?] his original 'end of history' thesis, arguing that since biotechnology increasingly allows humans to control their own evolution, it may allow humans to alter human nature, thereby putting liberal democracy at risk.' Uh-huh. Sounds like a virus in the ointment to me. Oops, I meant to say history is ALL BUT at an end.

So. Even given (hypothetically, temporarily, and solely for the sake of argument) the radical assertion 'Religion, by and large, is an ego problem,'—how could it fail to be a superego problem, if we're relying on crude formulations of mind?—I do not see how the same ego problem could be said to explain anyone's belief in the 'end of history' in the Fukuyaman sense (though cerebral trauma due to repeated head-dropping might.) Frankly, I don't see any logical application of this so-called 'post-Cold War meme' to the issues and conflicts that have beleaguered the Middle East; in fact, those issues and conflicts would seem to argue against any such stance—though Mr. Fukuyama would doubtless explain them away with all the grace of a startled gazelle escaping a peritonitic lion.

At bottom, however, while I revile religious belief of all flavors and care not to form any defense thereof, I just can't get behind your claim that 'belief in the immortality of the human soul' derives from or is attributable to an inflated ego, at least in any Freudian or street sense of 'ego'. I genuinely believe the human ego can be more correctly said to justify each and every 'Here is my truth' statement in this thread (mine, yours, others') than to justify a primeval, seemingly hardwired notion like 'I am and therefore cannot not be.'

In general, and in an attempt to justify my petulance and fractiousness with a glance, at least, at the original topic, I frankly get put out when people seek to proscribe avenues of discourse because they disagree with them or are tired of hearing them. It basically says, with the certitude (if not the amplitude) of conviction of an Arab killing Jews for Allah, 'I have weighed all the possible issues and opinions, and this one, this one, and this one are utterly wrong. And the people that think that, suck.' Sigh. I know I am hypocritical, because I think the people who think Jesus wants me dead for being a faggot, suck. Oh well.

Fukuyama has a super ego!

[flintultrasparc.livejournal.com]

I agree. it's a Super-Ego problem. I was being funny. I still don't think a desire for immortality is inherent to the Id. The Id doesn't think about stuff like that. If anything, the id wants to enjoy life the most, or escape it's problems. All this angst over potential non-existence definitely seems to be working on a much higher level in the consciousness.

I, apparently controversially, don't think religion is at the heart of this conflict. Many folks in the U.S. (and Canada) seem to wish to interpret the conflict through a religious viewpoint--which I suppose is only to be expected among societies more religious than Israel.

I think we are just semantically stretching sabotabby's rant against some very stupid arguments that start with a position that mass murder is a solution to conflict that has directly killed less than 15,000 people since 1936. Not that the discussion and it's tangents aren't fascinating.

I'm glad I could tell you about Fukuyama. I've been annoyed with him since 1992.

Can the posthumans count on your support against the fans of Jesus the homophobe? I mean, if they hate you for wanting to do what you are capable of with just your god-given biology, wait till they find out about the people who want to splice chlorophyll production into their DNA.

Re: Religion is an ego problem

[terry-terrible.livejournal.com]

I think is usally a reference to Fukuyama; and really doesn't have much to do with the apocalypse; so much as regarding the struggle between capitalism and socialism is over--and now all remaining conflicts will be ethnic and religious.

That idea has been around for a long time before Fukuyama, since it's pretty part and parcel of millennialist religions (in the chirstian second coming, jesus comes to fight evil, wins, everyone lives in utopian happyland for a thousand years and then all the good guys go to heaven) for thousands of years.

In the modern sense, Fukuyama ripped that idea off from Marx, which is pretty damn ironic in itself, but not surprising since most capitalists are just as mistakenly materialist as Marxists are, though they like to claim that they are some kind of different breed.

Re: More underestimation of the power of moronic things written in some book somewhere.

[sabotabby]

What flintultrasparc said—it was a reference to Fukuyama, not premillenial dispensationalism. Arguably, though, both Fukuyama and the fundies suffer from a similar flaw in their thinking, which is that they live at the most significant point in human history.

And this is the point—"glass the desert" presumes that the current situation, which while having deep historical roots only goes back to 1948, is a permanent state of affairs. This permanence would make it unique amongst all conflicts throughout history, as the One That Is Permanently Unsolvable. By coincidence, it is also the one that is particularly prominent right now, while we (the special people living in the most special time) happen to be alive.

Make sense (I was rather angry when I wrote this)?

Re: More underestimation of the power of moronic things written in some book somewhere.

[fr-defenestrato.livejournal.com]

Yes. I am perhaps impoverished of historical education, but I can't quite accept that 'the current troubles' are 60 years old and no older. If you insist on shackling a political struggle with the accoutrements of current political structures, sure, you've got your 'current situation'. But how fair is that configuration, exactly, given millennia of animosity and violence?

Anyway, I've responded above re Fukuyama and his 'end of history'. Pooh-pooh, said I. I guess for all the minutiae in which we differ, we can both go Pooh-pooh under the same standard. Yay!

Re: More underestimation of the power of moronic things written in some book somewhere.

[flintultrasparc.livejournal.com]

given millennia of animosity and violence?You're talking about between Jews and Christians, right?

[rbowspryte.livejournal.com]

I got over that "turn the desert to glass" bullshit in high school at around the same time I got over Ayn Rand.

Fuckin' Ay!

you have an ego problem or are heavily invested in your own apathy, or both.

ZinG!

So many folks I know pride themselves on impressing others with what an asshole they can be and what freakin' insulting thing can next come out their mouth. I think their apathy is a mask for a humanistic/diplomatic or sheer cognitive puzzle too hard for them to crack or too frustrating to ponder. Like parents who only know discipline through violence (If I hit it it will stop.)

Hey I'll help braid your hair if I can remember how. You can braid mine too.

[troubleinchina.livejournal.com]

So many folks I know pride themselves on impressing others with what an asshole they can be and what freakin' insulting thing can next come out their mouth.

I agree with this comment completely.

Also, I am braiding my hair right now.

Gordian Knots, etc.

[jordansc.livejournal.com]

"I think their apathy is a mask for a humanistic/diplomatic or sheer cognitive puzzle too hard for them to crack or too frustrating to ponder."

It's the asshole version of lateral thinking: the best solution to the problem (they maintain) is the one that is utterly unthinkable & will outrage anyone who actually cares about the issue. It's a way of posing as not only cynical but also coldly clear-sighted, a slaughterer of sacred cows, etc.

[sabotabby]

I'm afraid my hair is too short to braid now. Can we wait a bit? I mean, if history lasts that long?

[fr-defenestrato.livejournal.com]

On behalf of assholes everywhere, I'd like to point out that for you to ignore MY sheer hair-pulling frustration in the seemingly interminable and seemingly unsolvable conflicts in the Middle East (and elsewhere) demonstrates precisely the same sort of assholic impatience on your part, with respect to me. The attitudes on display here are holier-than-thou, smarter-than-thou, and truly distasteful. Tell me: have YOU cracked the cognitive puzzle that is the Israel-Palestine conflict?

But never mind me, I'm only interested in saying freakin' insulting things.

[turkishb.livejournal.com]

But I already made the down payment on the squid. This is now your problem.

[sabotabby]

Mass calamari?

[turkishb.livejournal.com]

Now all we need to do is figure out who purchased an island, borrow some stereo equipment, and I think we have a pretty bang-up tiki party in the works!

[sabotabby]

I think the fellow who purchased the island is a vegetarian. So am I, though I make an exception for Junior Mint cheesecake and calamari made from giant squids.

[turkishb.livejournal.com]

Well, I'm a vegetarian, too, but we're eating this squid for peace doncha know. Tiki parties are always a labor of self-sacrifice.

[metalana.livejournal.com]

The Middle East conflict is rather unpleasant to read about, so I have remained quite ignorant. So I was under the impression that Jews & Arabs have been conflicting for a long time. Can you point me to some more accurate history?

[chickenfeet2003.livejournal.com]

Actually only since Zionists started trying to buy up land in Palestine (early 20th century). Before that Jews had been living peacefully in large numbers in the Islamic world for centuries. No pogroms in Baghdad or Damascus. Historically it's Christians and Jews who don't get on (or, more accurately, Christians who persecute Jews). Favourite Jew/Arab coxistence story; Maimonides was Saladin's personal physician.

[seilduksgata.livejournal.com]

Well actually there were pogroms in both Baghdad and Damascus...for example the 'farhood' in Baghdad and the Damascus Blood Libel. I dont have access to sources right now but theres some stuff on wikipedia.

General: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Jews_under_Muslim_rule#19th_Century
Syria: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Damascus_affair
And some books on the pogroms/anti-semitism in Iraq: http://www.babylonjewry.org.il/new/english/index.html

One thing we seem to agree on though is that Jews in Islamic countries had it better than those in Christian Europe.

[seaya.livejournal.com]

This is kind of sanitizing things. What seliduksgata said and also during and after WWII the Arab world expelled a lot of Jews in reaction to Zionism...which had the opposite effect they had intended.

[eumelia.livejournal.com]

Yep... that's exactly how it is, "they" don't want peace.

Ummm, which "they" are we talking about? I know that Jews are white in this context and thus and "us", but one can never remember if Jews ever manage to get rid of their scapegoat reputation... 'cause ya know, Jews=Israel so very nicely and Palestinians=Terrorists just as sweetly.

*wishes she was an ostrich*

[sabotabby]

I encountered some "they don't want peace" from some folks at the demo too. It seems to be going around.

[austintacious.livejournal.com]

Thank you for addressing the "Glass Bowl Argument." I hear a lot of that idiocy down here in Texas. Assholes.

[sabotabby]

I propose re-education camps where people who make the glass bowl argument are forced to watch film and look at photos of the bombings of Hiroshima and Nagasaki until they throw up.

[mhnicholson.livejournal.com]

Given the popularity of apocalypse films, I wouldn't expect much from this approach.

[jordansc.livejournal.com]

"If you believe that said conflicts will not be resolved because you are the sort of curmudgeon who believes that people will always be fighting for some reason in one part of the world or another, then I disagree with you, but I'll shrug it off and not think any less of you for being cynical. I like cynics—I am one, at times—but if I didn't think a better world was possible, I'd have to pretty much give up, y'know?"

My Freshmen always resort to this argument. Since the dawn of time, X problem has existed, therefore it always will and there's really no point of thinking about it any further. This is usually followed by a sketch of human nature that includes the problem, as if we're all just equipped with genes that code for racism and factory farming. There's something to be said for cynicism, but I've lost all patience for this sort of fatalism.

[ironed_orchid]

Freshmen tend to be really deterministic thinkers. Some of them get over it. One of mine even apologized a couple of years later.

[sabotabby]

Since the dawn of time, X problem has existed

I would ban that phrase if I could.

[dmlaenker.livejournal.com]

I think that Jews and Palestinians do want peace; but I also believe a majority of them (or at least those in power) want victory more than they want peace.

I wish I knew how to change that.

[sabotabby]

In a conflict situation, everyone involved wants victory more than they want peace*. This can be said for every war, just or unjust.

* And it's understandable, actually, I think it's quite natural to desire dignity above peace.

[terry-terrible.livejournal.com]

I often wonder if a major part of the problem if one or both of the sides basically believe that dignity requires complete victory?

Therefore, at least for a minority like the Likud or Hamas, nothing will ever be enough?

[seanmonster.livejournal.com]

What if I believe that Israel has a national equivalent of Battered Child Syndrome?

[culpster.livejournal.com]

BCS is an ugly thing at age 62, take it from me.

[sabotabby]

You have a great deal of evidence on your side. It's a nation founded on trauma.

[ayoub.livejournal.com]

Two things:

1. The tribal nature of the Arab world leads to territories being of huge importance.

2. When a culture has the word "thank you" being the same as "thank god" it's hard to separate religion from political actions.

[sabotabby]

Neither of these convince me that the conflict cannot end. Far worse conflicts with much higher body counts have ended.

P.S. This rant was not directed at you but at your appallingly ignorant friend.

[ayoub.livejournal.com]

Everyone has their views... And nobody who has a strong opinion can be ignorant :)

And for any conflict to end, both sides have to want it to end. They have to want to coexist. If that happens, I'll be over the moon, but I don't see it happening in my lifetime...

...word "thank you" being the same as "thank god"

[bike4fish.livejournal.com]

Did you ever think about what "good-bye" means?

I often get "God bless you" when a "thank you" would be much more appropriate. Those Christians are just scary.

On #1, it should be pointed out that urban culture has been around a lot longer in the Middle East than it has been in Europe.

Re: ...word "thank you" being the same as "thank god"

[queerasmoi.livejournal.com]

Not to mention that French "adieu" means "to God". And we all know how they turned out.

Re: ...word "thank you" being the same as "thank god"

[ayoub.livejournal.com]

But at least good-bye has lost its religious connotations... :D

[flintultrasparc.livejournal.com]

Since when aren't Jews a "tribal" people? They loaned (well, at least one of them did) their tribal god to gentiles (including Arabs), so... it's sort of their fault. ;)

In terms of territory, the state of Israel seems very interested in maintaining territories for defense, but not enfranchising the residents into it's representative democracy.

[ayoub.livejournal.com]

:D

I can only comment on the Arabs, because I'm more familiar with that culture :)

[culpster.livejournal.com]

The globe poll ran, what, 91-9 in favour of 'not in our lifetime'... Too bad they didn't break it down like this, something tells me the international socialist option was not heavily voted :)

I have been tending toward Apocalyptic Optimism, ie 'this must change, some mysterious way, because if it doesn't then ALL EARTHLINGS WILL DIE.' But as usual this is an attitude not an analysis.

And, really, though I'm not pimping for any of the Group B stuff, I AM an idiot, as became clear after reading a couple I. F. Stones. What the fuck do I know what's going on 'over there'? I'm like a Latvian pulling for Quebec separation because I read some Leo Panitch.

I just know terror when I see it, and tend not to like it.

[sabotabby]

"Not in our lifetime" isn't the same as "not ever."

[culpster.livejournal.com]

It is if you're a narcissist like me :)

[kynn.livejournal.com]

Watchmen reference FTW.

[sabotabby]

I'm a bit obsessed with Watchmen lately (you know, it's been in the news and all) so my solution to all problems seems to be "drop it down an elevator shaft" or "drop a giant squid on it," depending on my mood.

[apperception.livejournal.com]

That was a pleasure to read. Also, you're rather hot when you're pissed.

[sabotabby]

You should have seen me! All fired up, right hand on the mouse, left fist in the air, crying: "Something is wrong! On the internet!"

[apperception.livejournal.com]

Yes. I had a similar moment this morning.

(Okay, I'm printing this off now and taking it with me to the bathroom.)

[99catsaway.livejournal.com]

"they" don't want peace;

After having a big discussion about it this weekend (actually, many small discussions) I'm not really sure of anything about that anymore. I'm more pro-Palestine than my boyfriend is (the person I've been discussing this with) but he just keeps bringing up the fact that Gaza elected Hamas, and he can't get over that. And I have a hard time getting over it too, to be honest.

Also my dogmatic atheism (it's been growing over the years) is keeping me from sympathizing with the religious fundamentalism on both sides.

[dagibbs.livejournal.com]

Gaza (and much of the rest of the occupied territories) did elect Hamas. But this wasn't so much in favour of terrorism as a protest against the corruption of the existing government, and its inability to deliver services -- which Hamas was doing well on the local level. At least, that is my understanding of the situation.

Also, what is terrorism or not really depends on the point of view and the person or persons defining the acts. e.g. Hiroshima & Nagasaki.

[sabotabby]

Had I been living in Gaza, I'm not sure who the hell I'd vote for. (Well, no, I'd have probably voted PFLP but they wouldn't have a chance.) Do you vote for the guys who have the most to gain from building a massive wall (Fatah were that corrupt) or the crazy right-wing fundamentalists? Either way, you get screwed, might as well go for the people who'll pay for schools and roads.

I don't think peace is the first priority of people living in Gaza. It certainly wouldn't be mine under the circumstances. But that's different than them not wanting it at all.

[99catsaway.livejournal.com]

I agree, and I attribute most of the difficulty in attaining peace to a small minority of politicians rather than the actual mass of people who live and die in Gaza.

[fr-defenestrato.livejournal.com]

Yes but.

• Jews and Arabs have never gotten along and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been going on since the beginning of time and they never will get along because of something moronic written in some book somewhere;

That many moronic things written in some books somewhere have been used as justification for millennia of warfare and all comprised atrocities is inarguable. That they 'never will get along' is just a grumpy, aghast corollary: not very helpful but not necessarily the most outlandish belief about what shall come to pass in the pantheon of outlandish beliefs about what shall come to pass.

[sabotabby]

The thing is, eventually all of those wars ended, at least for long periods of time. The wars are never just because of the moronic books—they are economic and political and land disputes that the books are used to justify. My proof is that I encounter people of different faiths every single day, and we manage not to kill each other despite the fact that they probably sincerely believe that I'm going to hell.

[fr-defenestrato.livejournal.com]

Heehee, if that is true, then glassing the Middle East will at least decrease its inhabitability and thereby the impetus to fight over the real estate. QED.

[bike4fish.livejournal.com]

Wait - I thought the squid idea was pretty good.

[sabotabby]

Yes, but now this LJ entry exists as proof of who was behind the squid idea so we're all still screwed.

[caudelac.livejournal.com]

Basically, my 2 cents-- two things need to happen here:

Israle/Palestine need to be combined in a singular, secular state. Jews and Muslims can, I think, due to the restrictive nature of their religious laws, only be truly protected (alongside the natural rights of individual citizens) by a state dedicated to ensuring religious freedom for all of its citizens. Such a state would be dedicated to ensuring that Halacha and Sharia could be carried out quietly-- AS LONG AS SUCH DID NOT INTERFERE WITH BASIC HUMAN RIGHTS, or were enforced on non-practitioners of those religions, as much as possible. Do I think this would be easy or without problems? Of course not. But is it the solution that would ensure things like, oh, Muslim homes being destroyed or denied building permits because of where they wish to dwell could not happen, as well as preventing the persecution of Jews that Israel was created to prevent? I think so. At the very least, it would give recourse to those prosecuted. But I believe that all state should be separate from religion; I take the opposite view as Dostoevsky and think that the state has a responsibility to protect the practitioners of any given religion from persecution, and everyone else from religious restriction.

2) Jerusalem must become, like Vatican City, an independent religious city-state ruled by a triumvirate of Jew, Muslim, and Christian representatives, or at least Jew and Muslim, but neutral as much as possible. Either way, allowing it to remain a point of contention is... bad. I can think of no better term.

But seriously, the Jews (all Jews, especially the Israelis) ought to be considering how to contribute more to Tikkun Olam, rather than being bristly when it comes to their Arab neighbors (which I mean in a sesame street, 'these are the people in your neighborhood' kind of way-- the folks you have to live with, whether you like it or not). And as to the Muslims... I'm far less familiar with their beliefs than with the Jews, but I hardly think that peace is beyond them either, and that they can find repairing the world an undesirable thing.

Oddly enough, it seems that most of the things I'm hearing on the news (I listen mostly to NPR, admittedly), are very pro-Palestine, and are if nothing else, being quite chilly towards the Israeli actions here, and critical of American silence on the matter.

But that could be just me.

[flintultrasparc.livejournal.com]

Actually, I don't think religion and specifically Halacha and Sharia are really at the root of this conflict.

It's far more about nationalism and a secular jewish ethnic identity, and it's role as a settler state and the dispossession of the indigenous arabs. The PFLP was always a secular outfit. You have to understand how figures like George Habash fit into the conflict. Atheistic (and agnostic) jews are so cliche as a stereotype, and not just in the journals of nice jewish girls against the occupation like sabotabby that it has it's own Wikipedia reference and claims that among Israeli jews... 44% are secular, 35% don't believe in God.

The U.S. is a far more religious society.

When civil society suffers from war, and secular and leftist organizations are systematically destroyed, people often turn to both religion and militant acts of desperation. Iraq, for example, was once a very secular society: next to Israel, women there had the most rights of anywhere else in the middle east.

However, your idea for a single, secular state in the Israel/Palestine has merit. The late Edward Said, once a supporter of a a two state solution, eventually came out for a single state: "after 50 years of Israeli history, classic Zionism has provided no solution to the Palestinian presence. I therefore see no other way than to begin now to speak about sharing the land that has thrust us together, sharing it in a truly democratic way with equal rights for all citizens."

[sabotabby]

I think a prolonged just peace (as opposed to all of the ceasefires that have happened so far) would go a long way to reducing religious fervor. Both Israeli Jews and Palestinians have historically been more secular than other populations in the region, and turning to religion is mostly an act of desperation. Deal with the underlying issues and you'll see the religious bullshit cut down to the usual craziness you see in religious hot spots.

Also, this is the kind of thing that has made me get more statist in my advancing years. Because I really do think that a strong, though not coercive, state would go a long way to solving some of the problems there.

[flintultrasparc.livejournal.com]

Strong states mean less ethnic conflict? Not so sure about that.

Strong states mean less religous conflict? Not so sure about that.

I guess we have to start with your definition of "the state".

If anything "The State" has been the greatest proponent of ethnic and religious Homogeneity in the name of national unity.

It might be nice to believe that the Stalin, Mao, Tito or Lincoln were able to use the strength of the state to stop ethnic and religious conflict--but I don't think it holds true.

I do think multi-ethnic and secular societies are just peachy, I'm not sure that it is "statism" that brings them about or holds them together.

What would a non-coercive state look like? Anarchy. Libertarian socialism. Free Soviets. IWW's Industrial Democracy's Administration of Things. Kaianere'kó:wa. Whatever term you like best.

[sabotabby]

I think there has to be something, at least in the beginning, that restricts the ability of either side to kill each other (or use economic or political privilege to pass apartheid-type laws). But more importantly, there's a redistribution of resources that needs to happen, and that wouldn't work without some sort of overarching structure.

[flintultrasparc.livejournal.com]

I believe the redistribution of resources and the relation of workers to the means of production is the social revolution, comrade. It's the material component.

Now, "overarching" is a whole another ball of wax. I believe the Bolsheviks were convinced that the Ukraine needed to redistribute it's grain to Moscow by a ratio that Ukrainians regarded as punitive. The problem with overarching structures, is the overarchlords.

[sabotabby]

Well, that much is true. But it's also a matter of scale, which is one of the reasons the Bolsheviks fucked up (there are others, obviously).

[caudelac.livejournal.com]

I rather agree. If religion here is largely a blind, a thing clung to out of desperation, then it seems to me that a single, secular state is an even more reasonable option. If religious freedom is made a tenet of the state, then (perhaps I am optimistic here but) it seems to me that this pulls the teeth out of the religion argument.

Though I will say that it saddens me a great deal-- to see two angry and militant people using their religions as, essentially, meat shields. To coin a gamer phrase.

[queerasmoi.livejournal.com]

See, the more I hear about the Middle East right now, the more I just want to ram my head against a wall. I can't really say that I "support" any side because it's all violent. The only side I support is "stop killing"... and I have trouble seeing exactly how I, also a Canadian Jew, can do much to advance that cause.

A few people have asked me if I'm ever going to use my Birthright Israel privilege to get a free trip... and my answer has always been no (and that privilege will expire when I turn 26 in four months). I last visited Israel with my family, roughly around the time Saddam Hussein decided Iraq would invade Kuwait. Perhaps if some time in the distant future, Israel is no longer a 15 on a scale of 1 to clusterfuck, I will consider it.

[flintultrasparc.livejournal.com]

Take the trip, visit Palestine.

[queerasmoi.livejournal.com]

It's not that I'm afraid of getting killed, it's that the whole situation is so high on the clusterfuck scale that I just don't want to be anywhere near it. And visiting Palestinian lands would not help reduce the clusterfuck factor.

[flintultrasparc.livejournal.com]

Visiting would only help you understand.

[queerasmoi.livejournal.com]

It's beyond that... I don't want to understand anymore. I just want to burn all the newspapers repeatedly until there is some good news.

[flintultrasparc.livejournal.com]

Reality doesn't work that way.

Though, you can just read the funny pages.

Though I have to wonder what is causing you such angst because this problem doesn't directly effect you. Though perhaps it's lack of material effect on your own life is why you can have such an easy time to just avoid it.

I'm not criticizing your choice of not trying to understand this, but it makes me wonder why you read this post and participated in the thread.

[queerasmoi.livejournal.com]

Cause I'm still sabo's friend and I'm sharing my feelings. I don't really want to reply to you anymore though. Have a nice day :)

If Israel is a 15, Baltimore is a 120.

[flintultrasparc.livejournal.com]

Israel is far safer than where I live, Baltimore.

"Israel 2006:
5.4 deaths from crime, terror and war per 100,000 inhabitants

United States 2006:
5.7 deaths from murder and non-negligent manslaughter per 100,000 inhabitants

Various U.S. metropolitan areas* report above-average deadly violence. Here are a few examples from among many. The numbers represent murders per 100,000 residents:

New York City, 7.3
Los Angeles, inside city limits, 12.4
Los Angeles metro area, 8.4
Miami metro area, 7.6
Philadelphia (AKA the City of Brotherly Love), 27.7
Washington, D.C., inside city limits, 29.1
Baltimore, inside city limits, 43.3
Detroit-Dearborn metro area, 23.0

The numbers come from data announced by the U.S. Federal Bureau of Investigation in its Uniform Crime Reporting Program. This program compiles data from local law enforcement agencies throughout the United States.

The FBI reported that 17,034 acts of murder and non-negligent manslaughter took place in the United States in 2006. This was at a rate of 5.7 deaths per 100,000 inhabitants.

By contrast, Israel's 188 conventional homicide victims plus 30 people killed by suicide bombings and other acts classified as terrorism represented a rate below 3.1 violent deaths per 100,000 residents. The Second Lebanon War in the summer of 2006 took the lives of 119 Israeli soldiers and 44 civilians. This added 2.3 points to Israel's violent-death rate, raising it to about 5.4 per 100,000 inhabitants.

As a percentage of population, the deaths of 119 Israeli soldiers in a six-week war were more than six times as great as the entire U.S. military death toll in Iraq for all of 2006. Despite this, Israel's rate of deadly violence including the Lebanon war deaths was not only below the 2006 U.S. murder rate but was less than the lowest yearly homicide rate ever recorded in the United States (5.5 per 100,000 inhabitants)."
Violent death---updating the U.S.-Israel comparison.

Ofcourse, Canada is way safer than the U.S., but I don't know to many Canadians who let the U.S.'s high murder rate stop them from visiting.

* I changed the order of the cities in the metro report to list those with a high Jewish-American population. Dearborn has the largest Arab-American population for a city of it's size.

[sabotabby]

One can support "stop killing." It's presumably what most people everywhere want.

I never used my Birthright privilege. Not because I was afraid to go there—I still am planning to go there—but because when I was in my early to mid-twenties, I met a Palestinian woman who'd been forced to flee from Jerusalem when she was 12 and was never allowed to go back. And I don't think it's right that I'd get my plane ticket paid for and she couldn't set foot in the city where she was born.

[queerasmoi.livejournal.com]

That's one argument I had not considered - thanks for the insight.

[flintultrasparc.livejournal.com]

Hollywood cut the psychic alien squid. Fan boys everywhere will launch a jihad to defend the holy writ of the Moore prophet.

[sabotabby]

The squid may be out of the movie, but it will always be there in my heart—and my nightmares.

At least it isn't going to be this awesome script. Which I think Moore actually approved of, believe it or not.

[flintultrasparc.livejournal.com]

*skips to the conclusion* What? No! That's just dumb. Why ruin a great story about the futility of super heroes intervening in world conflict with a paradox about time travel.

[sabotabby]

If you skip to the conclusion you miss all the best bits, like Rorschach being a foul-mouthed chronic masturbator (I shudder at even having to type that sentence) and Night Owl [sic] and Silk Spectre rescuing hippies at an anti-war demo.

I laughed so hard that my sides hurt.

[arnavtul.livejournal.com]

gurgles
flails
cries

[sabotabby]

*hugs*

[sadie-sabot.livejournal.com]

co signed.


and, I'm tired of seeing well meaning people say "oh but it's all so COMPLICATED" or "both sides need to stop the violence."

[sabotabby]

It is complicated, but so are a lot of things. I was just thinking, and I didn't want to Godwin in the post itself, but look at the atrocities committed on both sides during WWII. And look at most of those countries now. If that can end—if Germany can go from being a haven of tolerance in the 20s to a genocidal terrorist state in the 30s and 40s to the awesome place that it is now, then there is really hope for all of us.

[sadie-sabot.livejournal.com]

yeah, I feel like the "it's so complicated" is just a way to avoid having to think or engage or take a stand, you know?

and thank you so much for that point aobut germany, that's actually really hopeful, and it's hard to find those hopeful gems right now.

[terry-terrible.livejournal.com]

WTF? I post that like that.

I was supposed to be:


• Jews and Arabs have never gotten along and the Israeli-Palestinian conflict has been going on since the beginning of time and they never will get along because of something moronic written in some book somewhere;

Cry Bernard Lewis *crocodile tear*

The only reasons to think that you're living at the end of history are because you have an ego problem or are heavily invested in your own apathy, or both

This should be tattooed on the forehead of every hardcore Marxist and Neocon. Congrats, you've won the internets today :)

[sabotabby]

I like to think that most Marxists grew out of this type of thinking, or else became neocons. This might be wishful thinking, though.

I need to go around telling people that they are not special more often. :)