Speaking at a gathering of the EastWest Institute, Harvard lecturer Jessica Stern made an unusual point:
Dr. Stern opened her remarks by saying that, while it may be true there is presently more violence being committed in the name of Islam than in the name of other religions, “all three major monotheistic religions have produced violence.”
She then drew a parallel between what she characterized as violence in the name of Islam and violence in the name of Judaism and Christianity, as well as in official responses to such violence on the part of leaders of all three faiths.
“I’ve heard a lot of bashing of Muslim clerics for not stepping up to the plate and condemning extremist violence,” she said. “But Catholic priests are not stepping up to condemn those who kill abortion doctors
Point taken with regard to the abortion doctors. But you miss the boat with regard to the settler movement. The issue there is not simply the assassination of PM Rabin. It is the 30 year effort to use the cover of military occupation to steal land from the Palestinians.
The abortion reference was not only invalid but irrelevant. The settler movement however lies at the heart of the issue of Islamic violence.
This isn’t rocket science. People in all cultures pursue the goal of dignity, freedom, and a voice in their own governance. With the exception of the Civil War, we in America have built a remarkably peaceful mechanism for working out the inevitably conflicting political claims of various groups and individuals. Without a stable political infrastructure however, those goals are pursued with violence. Even here in America – the Civil War.
The Palestinian people have been illegally and violently dislodged from their historical land while under military occupation. And there is no stable political structure through which they can seek redress for these grievances. And so they use violence, as would any culture, including our own, in the same circumstances.
Your facile dismissal of the reality of this situation, with trite cliches (“moral equivalence”) is simply a way of pretending that the grievances somehow do not exist. I suspect though, that if some foreign power occupied America (even if as a result of some policy of ours by which we “deserved” occupation), and that power then activly appropriated land for its own citizens to settle on, taking that land from you and your family, that you would find whatever means necessary to resist. As would I.
There’s a lot of history to that land as you probably know – the clock didn’t start in 1948 and the Palestinian Arabs have no monopoly on grievance. Even if they did, thinking people should be able to draw distinctions between varying degrees of good and evil. Blowing up school buses? Evil.
The Palestinian people could have had the peace, dignity and self-government you speak of but at every junction failed to take either the high ground or the olive branch, choosing the rifle and the suicide bomb instead rather than accept any kind of compromise.
Even among themselves now, rather than compromise together against their perceived common enemy they tear themselves apart, and tear down the foundations of the only political structures they have. This is probably the fault of the Jews in your book: The occupation of Gaza and the ending of that occupation both terrible sins against the infantilized people of Palestine.
“Whatever means necessary” covers a lot of ground: Would you send your children with suicide belts and poison-soaked nails to murder other people’s children? Would you trade in their actual lives against the hope for a theoretical future in which survivors of your tribe could push every last one of your enemies into the sea?
Probably not, but you apologize for those that do. We differ then. I suspect we always shall.
Joe,
Are you trying to tell me that the problem in Palestine only goes back 30 years? Seems to me that Israel has been fighting for existence since its inception.
The Oslo Accords gave the Palestinians the chance at a peaceful solution to the situation and look what they did with it.
What was the quote? “There will be no peace until the Palestinians love their children more than they hate the Jews.”
Sounds about right to me.
Joe,
There is either A: an immutable standard for right and wrong, or B: there is not.
If there is not, then all arguments are moot and force is sovereign. Protestations of immorality are meaningless “burbles” of random electro-chemical reactions with zero claim upon legitimacy.
If there is such a standard, it supersedes all opinion based upon the principal of Lex Rex.
So what is it Joe, an immutable standard, or potaytoe, potahtoe?
As an aside, it is amusing that acolytes of relativism do not argue with things like…gravity for instance.
Joe,
Your “knowledge” of the history of that land is stunningly inaccurate. As a matter of fact, it is Israel who has a claim on that land going back to biblical times. As lex said; “…the clock didn?
Joe,
Your “knowledge” of the history of that land is stunningly inaccurate. As a matter of fact, it is Israel who has a claim on that land going back to biblical times. As lex said; “…the clock didn’t start in 1948…”.
As far as self governence and their own state, they have had that handed to them on a silver platter, what with the elections they held, and Israel turning over Gaza. They chose instead to continue to attack Israel, and now it seems that they’re h**l bent on tearing themselves apart as well. But, alas, why let facts get in the way of an obvious bias against Israel… right Joe?
Jim C
In the years immediately preceding WWII, quite a few religious leaders made the kind of “moral equivalence” argument that Stern seems to be making:
***
German militarism, said one Methodist minister, “may be provoked by bitter belief..that there is no peaceful way of solving a desperate economic problem.” Condemnation of Hitler, according to a leader in the United Church of Christ, was a “short-circuited, adolescent hatred of individual leaders.” And a Unitarian minister in New York said that “If America goes into the war, it will not be for idealistic reasons but to serve her own imperialistic interests.” The it’s-all-our-fault line was echoes by a Reverend Holmes, who said that a German victory should be viewed as “the punishment for our transgressions.” Stunningly, comments along these lines continued to be made in 1940 and even in 1941.
***
http://photoncourier.blogspot.com/2003_04_01_photoncourier_archive.html#92262539
Joe,
There is, as I stated in an earlier comment, no such thing as a Palestinian. It’s a made-up term coined by the British to denote arabs living in what was once both Israel and Judea.
The various arab nations, such as they are, have had nearly three generations to deal with the iddues of Israeli sovereignity. The United Nations has recognised Israel. However, certain Islamic nations see fit to keep the raw, bleeding wounds of the “Palestinians” open an undressed in attempts to divert the attentions of their own people away from the despotic religio-oppressive regimes in which they live.
Supporting the false ideology of Palestinian Rights is useful to them. However, it does not, as you say, address the core issues, which, to be blunt, is Israel’s right to exist.
Jordan offered millions of acres to relocate the Palestinians. They refused. Egypt offered land. Syria and Lebanon offered land. In each case the Palestinians (a tvulgar erm I use not for accuracy, but because of it’s commonality) refused the offers and returned to doing what they do best: Sowing death, misery, and destruction wherever they may be.
Don’t you DARE be preaching the moral equivalanvy of terrorists to Israelies. Don’t you DARE to lecture that Palestinians have any rights to complain about their plight(s). They are suffering from self-inflicted wounds. they need to, like the rest of the world, get over it. deal with it and move on.
Hostory gave these “Palestinians” a chance. they turned it down and instead chose barbarism and cruelty as their mark on history. I have no remorse for their destruction, no pity for them. They are reaping what they have sewn, and the sooner they go into the dustbin of history, the sooner Peace might have a chance to actually appear in those poor blood-besotted lands.
Respects,
Ho-hummm- Jessica Stern? Is she the wife of Howard?…
re- “It is the 30 year effort to use the cover of military occupation to steal land from the Palestinians.”
Land that was occupied after it was fought for and won in blood..all after being sneak attacked on Yom Kippur. Ever check the Israeli death toll in the 67 & 73 wars Blow? About as bad for Israel as WWII was for the US in WWII…..Blow, you need a better education and this time pay attention to the facts. BTW, Blow you aren’t alone in your ignorance- unfortunately.
Palestinian? I’m with Tim on this one. Blow, you must mean Arab, don’t you? Hell their own Sheiks sold the Zionists the land that became Israel. 96% of them that left thought they would be back in a month after all those Arab armies crushed the fledgling state. Wrong! Again.
Grievances? Be real here Blow. If Israel disapeared tommorrow and moved to Nevada, Arabs, Sunni ans Shia, would still kill each other or their neighbors. Welcome to Hammarabi Times, Blow. It’s a cultural defect for ‘em. A fatal defect- no pun intended.
Western civilization Blow. You enjoy the benefits…get a clue. Look at the big picture, not just what some revisionist BS you read or some professor with an agenda said. Sure those folks could use a homeland but be real. How many chances do they get? They’ve blown it so many times it’s ludicrous- beyond tragic. And to make it double tragic- there ain’t much we can do about it.
AW1- We saw & heard Joe Blow on the other side of the street- last St. Patrick’s Day.
b2
Isn’t it odd that no Jew can settle on any “Arab” land? Take a look at the map. There is one hell of a lot of “Arab” land. Israel is a teeny, tiny little place…
As to the Palestinians, so many of them are doing what ever they can to get out of Gaza. I wonder how many of the ones that are now trying to flee voted for Hamas…
As to Yasser Arafat… He must be spinning in his grave to hear that Fatah, an organization that he founded, is now being called the “American-Jew Army”. I mean, try to wrap your brain around that!!!
“They are a nation of sheep-stealers.”
I have trouble believing that Americans could ever resemble, regardless of the circumstances, the bizarre death-cult that the Palestinians have become, with their car swarms and explosive costumes for children. As Mark Steyn often points out, they’ve been a ward of the United Nations since 1948, and look at all the good it’s done them. Tragic, but at this point it’s no one’s fault but their own.
Casca:
I disagree. I heard they steal goats!
…and I didn’t particularly like what you said in the previous post about Michelle either, actually… I am very glad you apologized. I guess that was kind of an apology, wasn’t it?
Lex,
Nicely phrased.
[...] remains a hot topic. Today, I liked Neptunus Lex’s challenge to lecturer Jessica Stern’s attempt to paint as equivalent modern Islam, Christianity and [...]
Just a comment on the likes of Prof Stern. When you have your head up your ass it is difficult to discern any other voice but your own.
I love how “journalists” like to compare the three major religions. Jew and Christians had their very violent times. But we learned and matured (hopefully) and grew out of that violence into more compassionate and enlightened people. Islam hasn’t grown since it was started. It’s stuck in the First Millenium. It’s forbidden scholars to question and to reach a deeper understanding — to evolve.
It’s their loss and their own fault. They don’t want to grow up and we can’t make them. It’s an adolescent religion that can’t grow up.