Elie Wiesel is a
worldwide personality. Through his powerful descriptive writing
about the Nazi concentration camps, he has come to personify the
suffering of the Holocaust. Among his many insights is the
famous observation, “The opposite of love is not hate, it is
indifference.” Wiesel has repeatedly put forth this idea.
In a 2011 commencement address at Washington University in St. Louis he told his listeners, “The greatest commandment — to me — in the Bible . . . is ‘Thou shalt not stand idly by.’ Which means when you witness an injustice, don’t stand idly by.” After a Boston lecture in 2012 Wiesel told Boston University students “I think that is the greatest danger, ignorance, which leads to indifference and therefore to detachment. . . .If somebody suffers and I don’t do anything to diminish his or her suffering, something is wrong with me.”
In a 2011 commencement address at Washington University in St. Louis he told his listeners, “The greatest commandment — to me — in the Bible . . . is ‘Thou shalt not stand idly by.’ Which means when you witness an injustice, don’t stand idly by.” After a Boston lecture in 2012 Wiesel told Boston University students “I think that is the greatest danger, ignorance, which leads to indifference and therefore to detachment. . . .If somebody suffers and I don’t do anything to diminish his or her suffering, something is wrong with me.”
Unfortunately, Wiesel has
identified himself with Zionism and by doing so has inevitably
been caught up in contradictions and dilemmas that challenge his
reputation as a moral icon. For instance, in May 2010 he made a
public appeal to President Obama not to put any pressure on
the Israeli government over the issue of Jerusalem even as the
Israelis evicted Palestinian residents. In doing so he revealed
his own indifference to the real nature of Israeli objectives
and behavior. As a result a hundred Israeli intellectuals and
activists wrote him a
public reply expressing “frustration” and “outrage” at his
attitude and actions.
Nonetheless, his comments
about indifference and insensitivity are important and
insightful and can be used as a standard to judge some of his
fellow Zionists, many of whom have been “standing idly by” for
decades and thus are examples of Wiesel’s dictum, “if somebody
suffers and I don’t do anything to diminish his or her
suffering, something is wrong with me.”
Part II – Israeli Indifference
Recently there have been
several articles calling attention to the fact that, as Uri
Avnery
puts it, “We [Israelis] have become so accustomed to this
situation [an occupation “going on only a few minutes drive from
our homes”] that we see it as normal.” Ethan Bronner, the
New York Times’ former Jerusalem bureau chief,
confirmed this pervasive indifference to the suffering that
Israeli policies and discriminatory practices cause. “Few
[Israelis] even talk about the Palestinians . . . .Instead of
focusing on what has long been seen as their central challenge —
how to share this land with another nation — Israelis are
largely ignoring it.”
More specifically they are
ignoring such revelations as the fact that since September 2000,
when the second Intifada broke out, Israeli forces have
killed over 1500 Palestinian children. According to the
Middle East Monitor, that means “one child killed by Israel
every 3 days for almost 13 years.” In the same time the number
of children injured has reached 6000 and the number under the
age of 18 arrested is about 9000. The suffering of Palestinians,
documented by the United Nations as well as private NGOs
such as Human Rights Watch, is ongoing yet apparently
unnoticed by the average Israeli.
Nor is any improvement in
the situation likely. While Israelis display indifference to
Palestinian suffering, the Israeli government has indicated its
intention to keep the regime of suffering going indefinitely.
According to Israeli trade minister Naftali Bennett, “a rising
star in the Israeli cabinet,” the idea of a
Palestinian state is “dead” and Israel should annex large
portions of the West Bank. Danny Danon, the deputy defense
minister,
agrees. “We are a nationalist government, not a government
that will establish a Palestinian government in the 1967 lines.”
Meanwhile, a significant number of Israelis, whether they think
about it or not, are
profiting from the expanding, and illegal, occupation of
Palestinian land.
Part III – The Role of Ignorance
Thus we can ask, using
Wiesel’s words, what is wrong with the Israelis that they care
little or nothing for the Palestinians’ 65 years of suffering?
Wiesel himself has part of the answer when he observes
“ignorance . . . leads to indifference and therefore to
detachment.”
Ignorance? Is the average
Israeli really ignorant in this matter? At first this assertion
appears ridiculous. After all, as Avnery notes, the suffering of
the Palestinians is never more than “minutes” from most Israeli
backyards, and it now and then violently boomerangs back on
Israeli Jews. Nonetheless, a kind of contrived, willful
ignorance does come into play. One can be raised in ignorance
and educated to a view of history that eliminates others’
suffering as well as one’s role in causing it. Entire
populations can be psychologically shaped this way, with those
doing the shaping being the truest of the true believers. Such
conditioned ignorance lays the foundation for indifference to
the fate of others. The Israelis have made an art of this
process.
Yet, this scenario is not
original with the Israelis and Zionists. In fact, many Zionists
learned how to see the world this way from Americans. Some years
back I published a book,
America’s Palestine in which this legacy is explored.
As it turns out, one of the Zionist themes of the 1920s was that
the native Palestinians were the Arab equivalent of hostile
American Indians, violently resisting the forces of civilization
and modernization. What was the average American’s attitude to
the fate of these Indians — to their brutal dispossession and
ethic cleansing? It was indifference which has grown greater
with time until most Americans do not give the Indians or their
fate much thought at all.
Several years ago, at a
debate held at the University of Pennsylvania, I tried to
explain this connection to an Israeli vice consul from the
Philadelphia consulate and his coterie of Zionist students. I
suggested to them that the long-term Zionist strategy was to
ethnically cleanse the Palestinians and then count on the world
to, over time, get used to and then forget this crime. In a
hundred or a hundred and fifty years, who would cry over the
Palestinians? About the same number as bemoan the Apache or
Cheyenne today? However, I also told them that in our
post-imperialist world, this historical scenario was unlikely to
repeat itself. The reception to all of this from the Consul and
his hangers-on was negative. They walked out.
Part IV – Conclusion
The indifference, leading
to detachment, that Wiesel so fears can quickly become a
habitual part of our lives. After all, so much of our lives are
just “a
stream of habitual actions” that can be either “rationally
useful or irrationally unfit for a given situation.” It is in
the latter case that we get into trouble. When Israelis ignore
Palestinian suffering they act in a way “irrationally unfit for
their given situation” and that means, in Wiesel’s terms, “there
is something wrong” with them. As Americans, we should recognize
the symptoms, for we too have repeatedly behaved in this
fashion. Having modeled this insensitivity for the Zionists, it
now stands as a mark of our “special relationship” with the land
of Israel.
Lawrence Davidson was born in 1945 in Philadelphia PA. He grew
up in Elizabeth NJ in a secular Jewish household. In 1963 he
matriculated at Rutgers University for his BA. At Rutgers,
Davidson developed a left leaning activist orientation to the
problems facing the US in the 1960s. In 1967 he moved on to
Georgetown University for his MA. -
www.tothepointanalyses.com/
No comments:
Post a Comment