Ricochet is the best place on the internet to discuss the issues of the day, either through commenting on posts or writing your own for our active and dynamic community in a fully moderated environment. In addition, the Ricochet Audio Network offers over 50 original podcasts with new episodes released every day.
Shouldn’t Jews Know Better?
I can understand how a genuine pacifist could so strongly deplore the inherent tragedy of war that the reasons for its prosecution are deemed unworthy and a generic sympathy for civilians caught in the middle is natural for all. What is harder to understand is how people purportedly motivated by such sentiments readily dismiss culpability for the horrific, inhumane acts of Oct 7 in which brutal civilian casualties were not incidental to a military objective but entirely intentional.
The woke moral framework is a strange beast.
Under the new order now oozing out of the moral open sewers that persist in calling themselves universities, only white people have agency and moral responsibility. And the new order is even retroactive. Columbus and Cortez, as white males, had to know that colonialism was wrong. In contrast, Montezuma, as ruler of an about-to-be oppressed people was not culpable for oppressing surrounding tribes and using them as slaves or human sacrifice. Similarly, Jews (officially white oppressors) should know better than to resist, much less cause any injury to victim people. Hamas (officially a non-white victim class) has no such moral awareness or responsibility
Islam promises an afterlife of sensual pleasures (at least for guys). Wokeslam promises that membership in a gnostic elite grants its members temporal freedom from the moral and social constraints of their heritage. The truly woke no longer have to listen to parental admonishments about deviant sexual practices, useless college majors or repugnant ideology because those parents are hopelessly tainted by the historic crimes of whiteness. Ozzie and Harriet might as well have owned slaves and personally shot a Cherokee child. They have no moral standing to impose all that traditional morals and family nonsense that is simply a deceptive form of cognitive bondage.
We need to grasp that under the new doctrine, human beings exist on two planes. There is the higher plane in which enlightened white people fight the evil white people who want to drag all white people down into the lower plane where their very presence disrupts native cultures, nature, and even the climate. The lower plane is the natural realm of victimized peoples. Their oppression is largely internalized and even in the unlikely event of its complete discontinuance, they can never get to the higher plane because as innocents they have no crimes to disavow.
Victimhood means perpetual dependence on the largesse of enlightened white people, like being a guilt-free Blanche Dubois ever dependent on the kindness of strangers. Kendi X’s vision of a supreme Panel of Experts to divvy up all wealth and resources without any checks and balances is almost a perfect projection of the new order—victims enjoying a perpetual stream of reparations and the illusion of power but with no actual ownership of the skills or specialized knowledge required to produce anything. [Presumably, there would need to be a national backroom with a disproportionate number of Asian and Jewish guys doing the actual calculations, planning, and production management because public schooling for black and other victim-class kids would continue to devolve into achievement-free victimhood training.]
In the perfect political incarnation of the new order, the still-systemically-oppressed-but-not-as-much-as-before victims would honor the good white people with their votes, gratitude, and admiration. The victim peoples would have lots of festivals, music, dances, and crafts within their plane that the enlightened white people (who have transcended their own culture) could benevolently visit and enjoy on weekends though without any appropriation.
That hierarchical arrangement is not slavery but a benevolent dependence in which positions and possessions are a gift from the higher plane. Substitute that arrangement for “slave” and John C. Calhoun would sound pretty woke:
But I take higher ground. I hold that in the present state of civilization, where two races of different origin, and distinguished by color, and other physical differences, as well as intellectual, are brought together, the relation now existing in the slaveholding States between the two, is, instead of an evil, a good – a positive good. – John C. Calhoun, speaking in the Senate in 1837
People in an actual national territory with actual national interests and actual citizen obligations with actual dangers from actual enemies is a dystopian nightmare for the truly woke. Wokedom can really only exist with physical safety, tenure, and a guaranteed income to support the illusion of moral transcendence. Being hauled down into being merely on one side when one’s country is threatened is more terrifying than whatever the nation’s enemy might do. White people should never have to be on that lower plane where they have to struggle to exist as the lesser peoples do. It is tacky and uncool. That whole Israeli survival thing is offputting and just needs to stop. Why don’t they get it?
Published in General
At one point in time, the nature of Israel’s treatment of people and the enemy was exceptionally different from how their enemies treated others that it was a beacon on a hill in the darkest night. Why are you different? Because God gave us another way to live.
And people from other nations would go through conversion – shaving the body, circumcision, and cleansing rites – just to be part of this nation so different from their own.
Yes, what was done to Israel is wrong. No one questions that. But that still doesn’t stop people from expecting that someone who truly has the higher ground would engage in war differently than their enemies.
Something about caring for the Palestinian children more than the children’s own people care about them should result in strong and radical conversion. Even if it costs some Israeli soldier lives.
That doesn’t mean there won’t be civilian casualties. But people would be far more forgiving if they saw Israeli forces willing to risk their lives to prevent collateral damage.
Do war differently than the enemy if you truly have more moral rectitude than the enemy.
The Israelis have done a far superior job of minimizing civilian casualties than did the USA in France in 1944 or in Iraq in the last decade. It matters not that the 30,000 figure is a lie because the woke zombie hordes refuse to accept that any response was justified. Whatever Israelis do short of national suicide is wrong.
People will never see that. Because it’s not reported.
That’s the guiding principle of the Israeli military. But it doesn’t matter.
1944 was way in the past, and who will ever know the facts at this point.
But I strongly disagree with this characterization of the U.S. military and Central Command actions in Iraq.
I was immersed in following this war in the early 2000s, but I don’t have time today to go back into it.
But I want to go on record as fiercely defending the work of the U.S. Central Command in Iraq to save lives and to help people as much as they could. All of the statistics that came out of that war were tainted by (a) the anti-Bush Democrats and Republicans and (b) the terrorist organizations, starting with Hamas and Hezbollah.
In so many ways, we are just continuing the public relations disaster that began in 2003.
I think Israel is the latest victim of this ongoing smear campaign against the United States.
Meanwhile, outfits like the appalling Amnesty International put out bilge like this:
The backstory?
This monster led a Popular Front for the Liberation of Palestine group that abducted an Israeli soldier in 1984, gouged out his eyes, castrated him, and then shot him. He was serving a life sentence for his crimes.
So far (via Powerline), responses have mostly been in this vein:
The whole thing is disgustingly reminiscent of WaPo’s fawning obituary for “austere religious scholar” Abu Bakr al-Baghdadi.
Not sure what it’s going to take to change the narrative.
Isn’t there a video somewhere, from not too long ago, of a Hamas guy explaining that they do, in fact, embed themselves within–and use–the civilian population to shield the terrorists/combatants from injury and death, exactly because they know that people like the Israelis “love life” and will be reluctant to kill too many civilians, whereas they–Hamas–“love death” and view civilian deaths as helpful and necessary to their military goals (the implication being, “the more, the merrier”)?
I think there is.
It would be nice to see some evidence of members of Hamas which, among its other achievements, is the elected governing body in Gaza being willing to risk their lives to prevent collateral damage to their own people.
They could start by surrendering.
It is hard to understand, because you are lumping together groups of people that are not alike and don’t think alike and don’t think like you.
The bombing campaigns in Ramadi and Mosul killed a lot of civilians. The point I have seen made is that the ratio of combatants to civilians killed has been vastly higher in Gaza. I am not accusing the US of war crimes, just that as a matter of raw numbers, the IDF has done a better job on this issue.
The point was that if a person is motivated by an aversion to war or natural sympathies to victims of organized violence, then those sentiments should also apply to what was done to the victims of Oct 7. It is an inconsistency no matter what differences or groups are presented. It also suggests that any expressions of compassion are pretextual and that it’s ideology masquerading as principled humanism.
Specifically, it is only hard to understand if you ascribe sincerity and consistency to the claimed humanitarian concern. One does not need to do a deep dive into multiculturalism or walk in the other fellow’s shoes to arrive at that rather obvious conclusion.
Henry Rogers flatters himself in imagining that he’d not only be a member of this Panel of Experts, but in a particularly esteemed position of leadership for his vision and wise counsel.
We learned a lot about urban warfare in Mosul. In fact, the IDF actually talked to our military experts before the IDF began its military campaign in Gaza.
Urban warfare is truly horrible.
I am still confused. Are you saying anybody who thinks Oct 7th was horrible should be supporting the current actions by the IDF?
You mean like all those anti-nuke activists who “inexplicably” never protested outside a Soviet embassy? All those anti-war activists who never marched against communist terrorism and mass murder and the imprisonment and torture of dissidents? 😉
And I never thought Mahatma Ghandi was all that courageous either, since he had little fear that the British Imperialism would just roll a tank over him like would have happened in China, for example.
We put a lot of resources in elite team extraction training and tactics in order to prevent and limit civilian casualties. My husband worked in some of those programs.
From my understanding, the world central kitchen was a drone strike… and then there was the church where women and children were shot in the back. So I don’t know.
There’s so many excuses. I’ve largely stayed out of this debate because war is messy, but the problem Israel has is a perception problem.
And that’s an information problem. They don’t control the information and so they are vilified. Same happened with Russia. But thrice attacking a civilian group and blaming Hamas does not help that perception at all.
This assumes bad faith by anyone not saying what you think they should say. How is that reasonable? I have opinions that are very narrowly tailored because this situation is fraught. My widely held opinion is this is an existential war for both sides. It has been since Israel’s read-constitution. There’s not going to be anything to really cheer for under those conditions.
But I damn well am allowed to be critical of IDF officers making poorly considered and heated comments implying genocide without being called a propagandized ideologue.
It is absolutely fascinating to watch the absolute difference in reaction to Ukraine/Russia and this conflict. There’s nothing principled in the conservative mainstream on either of these. In one case, it’s bad, evil, war crime. In the other, justified, reasonable, legit. But anyone who says something contrary is unprincipled. My bad.
At the end of the day, Israel’s goal is to rebuild their temple. Muslims know this, Israel knows this. This has been an open secret (or should have been) for anyone with any inkling of the politics of the Middle East.
Just because we are enlightened atheists with no culture and heritage pride doesn’t mean the rest of the world is.
If the Jews want to build a temple, they have to remove the mosque. End of story.
So regardless, existential war was inevitable.
This is one of the most incomprehensibly wrongheaded things I’ve read in a long while.
I’m dumbstruck.
Seriously? Israel has prophecies of a third temple. There is a Temple Institute dedicated to this. There are politics surrounding red heifer sacrifices.
I think it’s far more ignorant to deny that these are part of the politics here and they have been from its inception.
Notice, I’m not blaming either side for this. It simply IS.
This is how ignorant I am:
https://www.barrons.com/news/the-israelis-set-for-new-jewish-temple-on-al-aqsa-site-ccc39a5e
Anyone ever heard of this magazine? It’s a Murdoch owned journal. Never heard of it but it has its masthead and advisors easily accessible.
I agree there are Jews and Christians that want a rebuild soon. I do not agree that is a goal of nation of Israel.
The thing about the “soft bigotry of low expectations” is that it’s soft. It’s as destructive as regular bigotry, but the speaking fees are much better. It’s lynching with a velvet rope.
I think you underestimate the secularism of Israel.
Lynching with a velvet rope is one of the most beautiful and chilling phrases I have heard on Ricochet. Can I use that phrase?
I thought it was pretty good. Feel free to borrow it. — H.
The IDF is already taking “unnecessary” casualties in an effort to minimize the number of non-combatant deaths and injuries in Gaza, West Bank, and Lebanon.
Yes. This was obvious in the CWK attack and the church attack.
Useful Idiots.
Religious people make up a minority in Israel. I’d be surprised if the majority of Israel’s population wanted to rebuild their Temple. I don’t recall any of its Prime Ministers actively advocating for the rebuilding of the Temple, though I could be wrong.