FresnoZionism.org — ציונות פרסנו

What Israel has to deal with:

1. Idiotic ‘humanitarian’ flotillas where there are no humanitarian needs
2. A planned ‘fly-in’ of activists to Ben-Gurion Airport
3. Constant attacks from the UN and NGOs
4. A planned “anti-racism” conference by the UN, which supposedly represents the “world community” that will be a hate-Israel event, despite the fact that Israel is one of the least racist countries in the world
5. Distortions and outright lies about Israel in perhaps 80% of the world media on a daily basis
6. Consistent prejudice in the academic world in most countries — including the ‘friendly’ US — educating a generation to see Israel as evil and illegitimate
7. A concerted effort to rewrite history to make Israel responsible for the conflict and for the failures of the Arab world
8. A world-wide double standard that vilifies Israel while keeping silent about horrible genocides and racial-ethnic violence perpetrated by such as Omar al-Bashir
9. Attempts at economic, academic and cultural boycotts
10. The need for constant vigilance to prevent terrorist attacks, aimed at the most vulnerable members of society — and sometimes the need to heal from successful ones
11. Constant pressure from superpowers to give up land and security despite Israel’s history of being attacked and its tiny size and lack of strategic depth
12. A credible threat of a massive rocket attack from its viciously antisemitic neighbors at any moment
13. A country that is both developing nuclear weapons and saying every other day that “Israel will disappear”

That’s just off the top of my head. You can probably add to the list.

One of the worst parts of it is how all of this negative force has been internalized by many Israelis, who start to believe that maybe they really don’t deserve to have a state. Maybe they should all get back on a boat to Poland, despite the fact that about half of them came from the Middle East or Africa. This is apparently the position of Ha’aretz, considered Israel’s ‘most important’ newspaper by many outside of Israel.

Although the objective is deadly serious — the destruction of a nation and the death or dispersal of a people — there is nothing that this constellation of behavior resembles more than bullying. Let me quote a definition from Wikipedia:

Bullying is abusive treatment, the use of force or coercion to affect others, particularly when habitual and involving an imbalance of power. It may involve verbal harassment, physical assault or coercion and may be directed persistently towards particular victims, perhaps on grounds of race, religion, sex or ability.

The “imbalance of power” may be social power and/or physical power. The victim of bullying is sometimes referred to as a “target.”

Bullying consists of three basic types of abuse – emotional, verbal and physical. It typically involves subtle methods of coercion such as intimidation. Bullying can be defined in many different ways. Although the UK currently has no legal definition of bullying, some U.S. states have laws against it.

Bullying ranges from simple one-on-one bullying to more complex bullying in which the bully may have one or more ‘lieutenants’ who may seem to be willing to assist the primary bully in his bullying activities. Bullying in school and the workplace is also referred to as peer abuse. Robert W. Fuller has analyzed bullying in the context of rankism.

Bullying can occur in any context in which human beings interact with each other. This includes school, church, family, the workplace, home and neighborhoods. It is even a common push factor in migration. Bullying can exist between social groups, social classes and even between countries (see jingoism). In fact on an international scale, perceived or real imbalances of power between nations, in both economic systems and in treaty systems, are often cited as some of the primary causes of both World War I and World War II.

Bullying behavior has been studied quite a bit by psychologists, as well as related concepts like the lynch mob, scapegoating, blaming the victim, etc. All of this can be related to Israel’s treatment as a nation. While childhood bullying often begins spontaneously, the international bullying of the Jewish state was originally orchestrated by its enemies. Once started, though, bullying takes on a life of its own, in which new bullies are attracted to someone that has been marked as a target, much like chickens in a chicken house may swarm an injured bird and peck it to death.

The more sophisticated bullies devote considerable ingenuity in developing schemes to humiliate as well as hurt their victims, as well as to recruit new bullies. In the case of Israel, the phenomenon is amplified by the conscious effort of the bully leaders to increase the pressure and the natural tendency of people with ‘bully’ personalities to sense a victim and attack.

Major bullies include left-wing academics, who were probably bullied themselves at school and have a need to strike back, and President Obama, whose statement in his May 19 speech that the world is ‘tired’ of the endless conflict — intended to be understood as ‘the world is tired of Israel’, since he blames the lack of a solution on Israel’s refusal to make enough concessions — is a classic expression of contempt for the target of bullying.

In its particularly vicious way, Hamas’ captivity of Gilad Shalit and its escalating demands, the mixture of humiliation with arbitrary violence, is precisely bullying behavior. And Israel’s measured responses are interpreted as submission, a trigger for even more bullying.

In the case of the child bullied by older or tougher schoolmates, the solution is difficult. But where the target of bullying — as in the case of Israel vs. Hamas or vs. the international activist-bullies — is stronger than than the bullies, there is a clear solution.

It is the application of disproportionate force. As innumerable parents have told their children — at least, in my generation they told them this — “stand up and fight. Give them a lesson they won’t forget!”

In the international arena, this is called maintaining deterrence.

Technorati Tags: Israel, bullying

Ami Isseroff, z"l

Ami Isseroff died this week. A remarkable intellect, Ami was uncompromising both in his Zionism and, believe it or not, his socialism.  “I’m opposed to occupation, a member of the ‘peace camp’ and always will be,” he told me. But despite this, he well understood the nature of the Arab leadership and had no illusions about what would result from precipitous concessions. He kept his Zionist compass intact when many of his left-wing friends were losing theirs. Ami proved that it’s possible to be a left-wing Zionist today.

Naturally he took vicious hits from both the Left and the Right. That didn’t stop him. An amateur historian (though he had a doctorate in Psychology and worked in computer software), he always knew the facts far better than his opponents.

I first made his acquaintance shortly after I started blogging in 2006. Ami was always helpful to a fault, despite the fact that he and I disagreed about almost everything except the importance of the Jewish state.

We often argued. Insofar as I can remember, he never gave in on anything. Usually I just let the argument peter out. He believed that I should write “West Bank” instead of “Judea and Samaria” because “nobody to the left of Meir Kahane will read you.” I responded that I refused to let the Jordanian occupation define the Jewish homeland. We never settled this, of course.

He hated religion. I thought Judaism was a positive force. Once I wrote something that included the word ‘hashem‘. Almost immediately, I received an email: “‘Hashem?’ Did you lose your mind?” We didn’t settle this, either.

Ami was, above all, practical. “What you are doing is supposed to be hasbara, not making yourself feel good. Always ask yourself what the effect of your writing will be. And never lie.” He often made the point that only a tiny percentage of the world’s population is Jews, so why do we aim so much of our efforts at them?

He was fond of sending emails entitled “Hasbara this” describing things done by the Israeli government, the IDF or in Israel’s name that he felt were public-relations disasters.

His greatest scorn was reserved for Israeli politicians who made empty threats and right-wing bloggers who made Israel appear to be belligerent. One well-known blog had a banner that read “There is only a military solution.” This annoyed Ami no end — he tried to get the blogger to remove it (finally it was changed to “There is no diplomatic solution.” He wasn’t mollified). He would say “Israel must always be for peace first and foremost,” although he understood the need to be prepared for the worst.

Here’s an example of his writing, from an important 2008 article called “The future of Jewish anti-Zionism – a Zionist analysis“:

In large part, the Arab Palestinian anti-Israel movement is led not by Palestinian Arabs or anti-Semites, but by Jews. Halper, Beinin, Rose, Pappe, Chomsky, Finkelstein and Brian Klug, rather than Alloush, Abunimah, Fayyad Husseini, Qaukji, Tamimi and abu Youssef, are the intellectual mainstays of the movement to wipe out the Jewish state. Their English is much better, and they can cast their ideas in slogans acceptable to western culture. “Secular Democratic State” sounds so much better than “Drive the Jews into the Sea” to a good progressive, doesn’t it? It is hard to label them as “anti-Semites.” It is hard to discredit their lies. If a Jew and an Israeli says that Zionists commit war crimes, it must be true.Their appearances and their books and articles are lauded in the Arab world, and reprinted in Al-Ahram and Roz el Youssef alongside the latest “proofs” of the authenticity of the blood libel and the Protocols of the Elders of Zion. Not since al-Andalus (Moorish Spain) have Jews enjoyed such a Golden Age.

But he also wrote this (2007):

ZOA speaks for the extreme end of the revisionist movement, generating a message that alienates all but the most committed Zionists. The Zionist right in the US has struggled mightily to convince everyone that Zionism is synonymous with settlers and settlements and with the Greater Israel movement. That is exactly the point that the anti-Zionists are trying to make of course. The opposition score a goal every time Mort Klein and the ZOA come out against another peace initiative.

Ami believed that the Internet was the theater in which the information war between Israel and her enemies would be fought, and did what he could to create effective grass-roots support for Israel in cyberspace.

He was responsible for numerous blogs and informational websites, including MideastWeb, a resource for historical information, documents, timelines, etc. and ZioNation, an opinion blog. Unlike many writers — including academics and professional journalists — he understood the difference.

I last saw Ami in his home in Rehovot this January. He had already suffered a stroke which made typing difficult; but he continued his blogging and correspondence with help from his family and many friends. I learned many things from Ami, but one of the most important was that the labels of ‘left’ and ‘right’ often obscure reality more than elucidating it.

May his memory be a blessing and an inspiration.

You can read the eulogy written by his brother Hadar here.

Technorati Tags: Ami Isseroff, Israel