Religion & politics: I'm on the fringe, as usual :(
You would think that, by now, I would have figured it out, but I keep forgetting that people tend to assume that I'm as liberal in my politics as I am in my religious practice. I keep forgetting that it's safer for me to keep my big mouth shut on the issue of Israeli politics, because, unlike many of my non-Orthodox friends and acquaintances, I gave up on the Peace Now camp after the Summer 2006 War (the Second Lebanon War?).
It seemed to me fairly clear, after Israel gave Gaza to the Palestinians and the Palestinians attacked Israel from that same territory less than a year later, that the Palestinians and their allies were far less interested in creating a Palestinian state than in forcibly ejecting Israelis from theirs. Now, every time I open my mouth on the subject of the "Matzav/Situation," I just get into trouble. :( I have friends who're still involved in Peace Now, and others who accept the findings of the Goldstone Report. Oy. I'm half inclined to say that Israel should do its own investigation just to give the lie to those who think that Israel is trying to cover up its "crimes." Seriously, folks, what country in human history has ever been able to wage a war without civilian casualties (and what other country whose civilians were being attacked would be condemned for waging a war)? The Goldstone Report, if accepted for all nations, would permanently change the rules of war. But of course, it's not intended for all nations, it's intended only for the Jewish one.
It seemed to me fairly clear, after Israel gave Gaza to the Palestinians and the Palestinians attacked Israel from that same territory less than a year later, that the Palestinians and their allies were far less interested in creating a Palestinian state than in forcibly ejecting Israelis from theirs. Now, every time I open my mouth on the subject of the "Matzav/Situation," I just get into trouble. :( I have friends who're still involved in Peace Now, and others who accept the findings of the Goldstone Report. Oy. I'm half inclined to say that Israel should do its own investigation just to give the lie to those who think that Israel is trying to cover up its "crimes." Seriously, folks, what country in human history has ever been able to wage a war without civilian casualties (and what other country whose civilians were being attacked would be condemned for waging a war)? The Goldstone Report, if accepted for all nations, would permanently change the rules of war. But of course, it's not intended for all nations, it's intended only for the Jewish one.
posted by Shira Salamone at 3:29 PM
11 Comments:
Do you really believe it's as simple (or easy) as choosing "hawk" or "dove"? Do you think the Israeli public is that easily categorized? This has nothing to do with liberal vs. conservative politics in the conventional American sense. Rather, it has a lot to with assessments of threats, as well as domestic Israeli politics, something those of us here should have no say in.
Steve, you're probably right about the Matzav not being quite as black and white as I've painted it. As for me and my big American mouth, I suppose that, since my own son has never served in the Israel Defense Force/IDF (Tzahal), I don't have much to say. Not that that's ever kept anyone from saying something anyway . . .
I have friends and acquaintances with children in the IDF. They have the right to express an opinion. Those who have made aliyah, they have a right to an opinion. Those who have served in the IDF have a right to an opinion.
The government of the State of Israel is elected by its citizens, and accountable to them, not to me. I actively support the State of Israel and pray for its continued strength. I may not agree with a particular Israeli government, or some of its policies, but I do not have the right to criticize it (except to my spouse, who is remarkably tolerant and equally opinionated).
I agree on all counts.
I agree with TOTJ Steve that hawk vs dove is too simplified. But I disagree that I can't have an opinion or express an opinion. I am a Jew, I am a Zionist, and I support the state of Israel financially, spiritually, and with my vote and voice. Damn skippy I can voice an opinion on what they are doing.
Jdub, you can certainly have and express an opinion. But you aren't entitled to an expectation that your opinion should be considered by Medinat Israel.
"Jdub, you can certainly have and express an opinion." Steve, thanks for letting all of us opinionated galutniks (Diapora-dwellers) off the hook. :) But you aren't entitled to an expectation that your opinion should be considered by Medinat Israel." Sigh. It's either put up with it or move. And even moving is no guarantee--Israel being a democracy, your preferred candidate may not be the one who gets elected.
I was in EY on a UJC mission right after the end of the 2nd Lebanon War. One morning, we had a speaker -- a prof. from one of the universities, who discussed political and social conditions in Israel. It was fascinating. He had made aliyah from New Zealand, and was refreshingly, but brutally, frank. He explained how Israel suffered from the same political problem as the U.S. was generally experiencing -- that electoral politics had become so slimy and disgusting that the best and brightest of the nation no longer cared to pursue it, instead favoring business where they could make lots of money. As a result, he claimed, the political system was suffering from the mediocrity of the people who were willing to subject themselves to the political process. Consequently, we (Israel and the U.S.), were losing the potential leadership of our smartest, most creative citizens, because they couldn't see subjecting themselves or their families to such abuse.
" . . . electoral politics had become so slimy and disgusting that the best and brightest of the nation no longer cared to pursue it . . . " Too true, I'm sorry to say. :( Not to mention that a person has to be a multimillionnaire to be able to afford to run for office.
>>Too true, I'm sorry to say. :( Not to mention that a person has to be a multimillionnaire to be able to afford to run for office.<<
Not true. The current POTUS may have been affluent because of his wife's career and the sales of his books, but he's certainly not in the same category of Mayor Mike, soon-to-be ex-guv Corzine or (my all-time-favorite modern 3rd party candidate) H. Ross Perot, or even Mitt Romney, too name a few.
What can I say, Steve? Maybe I've been living in New York City for too long.
I've been saying for years that the only way to guarantee that running for elected office won't be restricted to the rich is for the Federal Communications Commission to mandate free campaign advertising as a condition of renewal of telecasting licenses and radio licenses.
Post a Comment
<< Home