Few days ago an uproar spread in Israel in opposition to the Israeli Army's treatment of Israeli Anti-wall protesters. Israeli soldiers were filmed beating Jewish protesters from the Anarchists Against the Wall movement, sparking a debate about how the Israeli Army was treating its citizens. I was actually surprised at the treatment of the protesters, and much more astonished with the uproar it has sparked.
So those bleeding heart liberals who oppose to the use of force against civilians have been so blind for the past 60 yeas of Israeli dominance, and have just woke up to the images of the soldiers beating fellow Jews? Or is their uproar related to the fact that the army was treating citizens in that way, and since Palestinians are not citizens then the army can do as it wishes? But even this assumption falls in front of the numerous events when Israeli soldiers fired at Arab citizens of Israel, killing tens of them in October 2000, in March 1976, in November 1956, and many other dates.
The heart of the matter is the fact that the beaten protesters were Jewish. The treatment itself, to those who opposed it, is not objectionable. What is is the fact that the subjects involved were Jewish. Because a Jew, in their point of view, is worth more than a non-Jew, then it is normal that you see a debate that did not occur even in response to the most horrific acts of oppression against Palestinians (whether citizens or not). If deep down in their mentality they believed that we are all equal human beings they would have come out long before seeing their soldiers beating their compatriots. But they don't believe that, I don't blame them they have been fed such attitudes since they were young, why should they go out of the mainstream?
2 comments:
sometimes the problem about these treatments is that against Palestinians is "acceptable" because it is supposed to be the only way to react to your violence (without in fact knowing if you were violent). In a similar way, when in Italy there were protests in Genova during the G8 in 2001 the violent reaction of our police was justified because it was against no-global and it was considered just a defence against their "attack" (there were children, scout, non violent movement ...), a defence against what they represent (not what they are) in the social system
Perhaps you are suggesting that the Israeli security services take a page out of the Palestinian security services in how to deal with dissent. We can all see the high standards you are setting.
Perhaps you might want tidy up your own house a bit before you pontificate.
Post a Comment