Posts filed under 'Palestine'

Chris Hedges on the (mis)uses of genocide

Chris Hedges, in Coveting the Holocaust, discusses the use of victimhood that, manpulated as it sometimes has been, can convey unique moral stature on the victims, allowing them cover for horrendous crimes. Hedges dares to speak out, which will undoubtedly get him on certain blacklists and lead to the inevitable accusations of antisemitism:

he communists, not the Jews, were the Nazis’ first victims, and the handicapped were the first to be gassed in the German death factories. This is not to minimize the suffering of the Jews, but these victims too deserve attention. And what about Gypsies, homosexuals, prisoners of war and German political dissidents? What, on a wider scale, about the Cambodians, the Rwandans, and the millions more who have been slaughtered by utopian idealists who believe the eradication of other human beings will cleanse the world?

When I visited the Holocaust Museum in Washington I looked in vain for these other victims. I did not see explained in detail the awful reality that Jewish officials in the ghettos—Judenrat—worked closely with the Nazis to herd their own off to the death camps. And was the happy resolution of the Holocaust, as we saw in images at the end of the exhibits, the disembarking of European Jews on the shores of Palestine? What about the Palestinians who lived in Palestine and were soon to be pushed off their land? And, as importantly, what about African-Americans and Native Americans? Why is the Nazi genocide, which we did not perpetrate, displayed on the Mall in Washington and the brutal extermination of Native Americans ignored? Why should billions in reparations be paid to Jewish slave laborers and not a dime to those enslaved by our own country?

These questions circle back to the dangerous sanctification of any genocide, the belief that one ethnic group can represent goodness, solely because its members are the victims, and another evil because from its ranks come the thugs who carry out mass slaughter. Once these demented killing machines begin their work the only thing unique is the method of murder. The lesson of any genocide is not that one group of human beings is better than another, but that in the intoxication of the moment, gripped by the mass hypnosis of state propaganda and the lust for violence, we can all become killers. All the victims must be heard. None are unique. And all of us have to be on guard lest we be seduced. We carry within us—German, Jew, Armenian or Christian—dark and dangerous lusts that must be held in check. I applaud the French. I hope the French action pushes the Turks toward contrition and honesty. But I do not wish for the Armenians to covet the Holocaust, to begin the process of sanctifying their own suffering. When we sanctify ourselves we do so at the expense of others.

Read the whole article.

Hedges is one of my favorite comentators. In the Truthdig about piece on Chris Hedges, they say:

Hedges, who is not a pacifist and supports humanitarian interventions, such as those in Bosnia and Kosovo designed to stop campaigns of genocide, nevertheless describes war as “the most potent narcotic invented by humankind.” He argues that violence has a dark fascination, something the Bible calls “the lust of the eye.” He writes that war is the pornography of violence, that “it has a dark beauty, filled with the monstrous and the grotesque.” “War,” he writes, “gives us a distorted sense of self. It gives us meaning. It creates a feeling of comradeship that obliterates our alienation and makes us feel, for perhaps the first time in our lives, that we belong.” War, Hedges wrote, exposes the capacity for evil that lurks not far below the surface within all of us. We are all culpable. War is about worshipping the death instinct, which Hedges, quoting Freud, refers to as Thanatos, the Greek God of death. War, he argues, starts out looking and feling like love, the chief emotion war destroys, leads to the annihilation of the other and finally to self-annihilation. War, he writes, is as close as we come to attaining a state of almost pure sin with its goals of hatred and destruction. His book draws heavily from his own experience and the literature of combat from Homer to Michael Herr.

Add comment October 23rd, 2006

Israelis believe Nasrallah over Israeli leaders

In a fascinating report, an Israeli study had people watch videos of Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah and Israeli leaders. They chose Nasrallah as being more believable and authentic.

During the poll, entitled “the management of Israeli PR during the second Lebanon war,” members of six groups were asked to watch video recordings of Israeli PR in Israel and abroad, and to answer questions…. The result of his latest poll show that Israeli PR was so lacking, that in my cases the public was forced to rely on the reports of Hizbullah leader Hassan Nasrallah.

Lebel says a good media leader relies on three points – gripping the audience, being watchable, and giving the feeling of certainty.

The participants of the poll were asked who gave the a sense of certainty regarding the continuance of the war, and who was most authentic. The results were unequivocal: The Israeli public chose Nasrallah’s speeches as giving it both.

“We reached a really crazy situation,” says Lebel. “A psychological situation which seems inconceivable: Instead of the Israeli public watching our national spokesman who tells it what is happening every day, who will minimize the chaos and who will be seen as believable, something unprecedented happened: The public perceived the enemy leader against whom we fought as having those characteristics, and waited impatiently for his speeches. Nasrallah contradicted the Israeli spokespeople more than once, many times contradicting the minister of defense – he was the first to announce the deaths of Israeli soldiers and the sad circumstances which led to them.”

I’m not sure if these results speak more to the quality of Israeli leadership or reflect an ambivalence in the public about the recent war, an ambivalence, perhaps, that wasn’t picked up by simple opinion polling on the war. In any case, in Nasrallah both Lebanese and Israelis, indeed, many Arabs, seem to perceive a true leader. Could this be the basis for future negotiations???

1 comment September 4th, 2006

Next Posts


Pages

Calendar

November 2008
M T W T F S S
« Oct    
 12
3456789
10111213141516
17181920212223
24252627282930

Posts by Month

Posts by Category