Americans are just as callous toward (non-American) human life as Israel... and this is not just an American or Israeli thing. Humans can be astoundingly callous towards anyone seen as Other.
It isn't a bug, but a feature.
One of the hallmarks of higher civilization/culture is that we struggle against that natural tendency at times. But wh…
Americans are just as callous toward (non-American) human life as Israel... and this is not just an American or Israeli thing. Humans can be astoundingly callous towards anyone seen as Other.
It isn't a bug, but a feature.
One of the hallmarks of higher civilization/culture is that we struggle against that natural tendency at times. But when push comes to shove, the Other gets shoved, with as much regret (usually) as a cat has for shoving something off the edge of the table to watch it fall.
We literally burned down Japan and Germany during WW2. The "conventional" firebombing raids killed more people than the atomic bombs. We killed a lot of French people in the lead up to the Normandy invasions and destroyed a lot of French property. We killed, directly or indirectly a LOT of people in Afghanistan and Iraq.
I do not point this out to say that we are evil because of that. However, it does show that we are human... and we often kinda, sorta feel bad about it afterwards (even if that doesn't actually change things or no real restitution is made).
There are a lot of things to be bummed out about in life. Unfortunately it is usually difficult to do anything about those things.
When has there been a lasting peace? Maybe when the Roman army took charge of most of Europe. But at that time there were conflicts in Asia. Now, the difference is we study history and we are supposed to have learned something such as wars only lead to more wars. The only way to create a lasting peace is when the victor in the war helps rebuild the loser, as the US did after WW II. That’s what Israel is refusing to promise to do.
They make a solitude and call it peace (often misquoted as they make a desolation and call it peace).
The only way to true peace is through the destruction of the Other and the continued effort to prevent the arise of the Other.
Now, that sounds totally nasty and genocidal, but that is not the necessity of it. It is the way that simple-minded, zero-sum type of people see. Your observation about the winner helping to rebuild the loser is a part of the thing.
The Other is a narrative and sociological/cultural construct that is based upon perceived differences. The tendency to see and prioritize difference versus similarity.
To create a stronger and larger and more powerful society, difference needs to be marginalized in favor of similarity (we are all human, we are all Americans, etc). Ideally preserving and respecting difference while not making it fodder for destructive narratives and actions.
E Pluribus Unam
or the Vulcan philosophy of IDIC (yes I am a Star Trek fan)
Building strength thru empasizing difference is weaker than building strength by embracing difference.
Inclusivity is, in the end more powerful than exclusivity. Exclusivity is easier, it's lazy. It appeals to the demons of our nature rather than the angels of our nature... and it tends to end badly.
The Romans succeeded for as long as they did because, in the end, anyone could be Roman.
Israel and the Palestinians have had multiple chances to find prosperous ways to live together, but each time one side seemed open to it, the other shut it down. After a while, the leadership of each side came to depend on that so they could talk peace and know it isn't going to happen. IF, the similarities were emphasized instead of the differences, a Palestinian state could have been a Mediterranean resort , with a Singapore like economy and a mutually beneficial trading relationship with Israel. If everyone spent their money building an economy instead of weapons the entire Middle East may be democratic by now. But, since they have different ways of worshiping, their leaders don't allow that to happen. Power is more important the lives of the citizens.
I think the only actual way forward WRT this issue would be some form of federal state that encompasses both Israelis and Palestinians, that provides solid (and relatively unbiased) protection to both.
The extremists on either side would never let that happen though.
Perhaps. It sure helped that there was a big bad enemy to worry about. With no Soviet Union, the rebuilding doesn't happen, and even if it had, would there be anywhere near the same level of good will between the US/UK and Germany and Japan?
And most changes in human behavior are slow. because humans (en mass) tend towards "conservative" behavior.
it is an evolutionary thing.
Expecting something to happen NOW, is unrealistic. It is very rare.
The Civil Rights movement (for example) didn't start in the 1960s, it started before the Civil War... and the reality is that it still isn't even remotely over.
Americans are just as callous toward (non-American) human life as Israel... and this is not just an American or Israeli thing. Humans can be astoundingly callous towards anyone seen as Other.
It isn't a bug, but a feature.
One of the hallmarks of higher civilization/culture is that we struggle against that natural tendency at times. But when push comes to shove, the Other gets shoved, with as much regret (usually) as a cat has for shoving something off the edge of the table to watch it fall.
We literally burned down Japan and Germany during WW2. The "conventional" firebombing raids killed more people than the atomic bombs. We killed a lot of French people in the lead up to the Normandy invasions and destroyed a lot of French property. We killed, directly or indirectly a LOT of people in Afghanistan and Iraq.
I do not point this out to say that we are evil because of that. However, it does show that we are human... and we often kinda, sorta feel bad about it afterwards (even if that doesn't actually change things or no real restitution is made).
There are a lot of things to be bummed out about in life. Unfortunately it is usually difficult to do anything about those things.
When has there been a lasting peace? Maybe when the Roman army took charge of most of Europe. But at that time there were conflicts in Asia. Now, the difference is we study history and we are supposed to have learned something such as wars only lead to more wars. The only way to create a lasting peace is when the victor in the war helps rebuild the loser, as the US did after WW II. That’s what Israel is refusing to promise to do.
Solitudinem faciunt, pacem appellant.
They make a solitude and call it peace (often misquoted as they make a desolation and call it peace).
The only way to true peace is through the destruction of the Other and the continued effort to prevent the arise of the Other.
Now, that sounds totally nasty and genocidal, but that is not the necessity of it. It is the way that simple-minded, zero-sum type of people see. Your observation about the winner helping to rebuild the loser is a part of the thing.
The Other is a narrative and sociological/cultural construct that is based upon perceived differences. The tendency to see and prioritize difference versus similarity.
To create a stronger and larger and more powerful society, difference needs to be marginalized in favor of similarity (we are all human, we are all Americans, etc). Ideally preserving and respecting difference while not making it fodder for destructive narratives and actions.
E Pluribus Unam
or the Vulcan philosophy of IDIC (yes I am a Star Trek fan)
Building strength thru empasizing difference is weaker than building strength by embracing difference.
Inclusivity is, in the end more powerful than exclusivity. Exclusivity is easier, it's lazy. It appeals to the demons of our nature rather than the angels of our nature... and it tends to end badly.
The Romans succeeded for as long as they did because, in the end, anyone could be Roman.
Israel and the Palestinians have had multiple chances to find prosperous ways to live together, but each time one side seemed open to it, the other shut it down. After a while, the leadership of each side came to depend on that so they could talk peace and know it isn't going to happen. IF, the similarities were emphasized instead of the differences, a Palestinian state could have been a Mediterranean resort , with a Singapore like economy and a mutually beneficial trading relationship with Israel. If everyone spent their money building an economy instead of weapons the entire Middle East may be democratic by now. But, since they have different ways of worshiping, their leaders don't allow that to happen. Power is more important the lives of the citizens.
Indeed.
I think the only actual way forward WRT this issue would be some form of federal state that encompasses both Israelis and Palestinians, that provides solid (and relatively unbiased) protection to both.
The extremists on either side would never let that happen though.
Perhaps. It sure helped that there was a big bad enemy to worry about. With no Soviet Union, the rebuilding doesn't happen, and even if it had, would there be anywhere near the same level of good will between the US/UK and Germany and Japan?
Consciousness is the start. the realization that smoking causes lung cancer started a slow revolution.
And most changes in human behavior are slow. because humans (en mass) tend towards "conservative" behavior.
it is an evolutionary thing.
Expecting something to happen NOW, is unrealistic. It is very rare.
The Civil Rights movement (for example) didn't start in the 1960s, it started before the Civil War... and the reality is that it still isn't even remotely over.