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

[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.

[sabotabby]

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

[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.)

[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.

[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.

[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.

[sabotabby]

*hugs*

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.

[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.

[queerasmoi.livejournal.com]

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

[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.

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!

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.

[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. :)

[terry-terrible.livejournal.com]

Why waste time with a trial? :)

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?

[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.

[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.

[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.

[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.

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.

[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?

[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...