discussion of Israel’s military and political actions. The genocide charge signals a moral harm of the highest order, raising questions about the state’s legitimacy and not just the state’s policies.
Second parallel: Jews'/Israel's original sin is false theology/ideology:
While other religions and heresies provoked sometimes violent opposition, Judaism alone across the centuries was unique in its status as a present, even visceral manifestation of a supposed inversion of Christian values. Jews did not, of course, face unremitting hostility in all times and places, but antipathy toward Judaism was nearly constant, especially when Christians sought to define the boundaries of their communities by assuring that Jews fell outside them.
Likewise, modern critics of Israel claim that its ideological foundation is qualitatively different from that of other countries. The claim is that Zionism—Israel’s founding ideology of Jewish self-determination and sovereignty in the biblical homeland—is inherently racist and discriminatory and therefore without legitimacy.
Third parallel: Jews/Israeli as the ultimate interlopers
As unbelievers, [Jews] were to be scattered abroad from their biblical homeland, without political or military strength. They were to be kept weak and ruled by non-Jews, with the Jewish diaspora and powerlessness serving as vivid symbols of Christianity’s triumph over Judaism.
Likewise, the Jews of Israel have long been portrayed as interlopers, temporary residents of the region, and destined for (or deserving of) expulsion.
Not just Christianity's triumph over Judaism: the dhimmi status assigned to Jews living in Muslim countries was a mark of their inferior position under Islamic rule.
Fourth parallel: Jews/Israel reduced to symbols
[T]he issues raised by the Israel-Gaza conflict are often framed as claims about Israel but sometimes seem to reflect other disputes. Israel is a vessel for these disputes, serving as a symbol of that which is objectionable, outdated, immoral, or ambiguous. For example, as noted above, there is much discussion about Israel and colonialism. While some of this discussion engages substantively with Israel’s history, more often the dispute appears to provide an opportunity for rejecting colonialism itself. This makes sense given that most Western examples of colonialism are in the past, leaving few opportunities for residents of Western countries to confront contemporary colonialism. Israel can serve as the superlative, ongoing example of a terrible, historical injustice previously but not currently committed by non-Jews.
But worth reading in full…
Leave a Reply