The Political Spectrum

The gut-wrenching scenes of Jewish settlers being forcefully removed form their homes are just about the only thing that is attracting any attention these days besides Mother Sheehan.  Fortunately it appears that withdrawal has not been accompanied by the sort of violence that many feared would take place.  

I am somewhat agnostic on the question of whether the pullout is a good idea.  Certainly the major risk is that it will signal to the terrorists that they have won this battle, encouraging them even more to ratchet up the violence.  On the other hand, demographic factors make continued security perilous, drawing resources away from the Israeli military when they should be applied elsewhere.  This is also Sharon’s hope that Israel can claim the moral high ground.  At any rate, the editors at National Review Online present a reasonable account of the situation.

It seems understandable to try and garner the moral high ground and offer concessions, but that would be a more successful ploy were Israel dealing with a rational opponent.  That the Palestinians are so rational is a dubious proposition at best.  What’s more, I must seriously question the idea that the pullout from Gaza will be able to convince the rest of the world that the state of Israel means well.  Quite frankly, at this point it seems the rest of the world is intent on equivocating between the two sides.  No matter how many Palestinian “martyrs” kill themselves and innocent Jewish (and non-Jewish) bystanders, and no matter the fact that Israel provides more rights to Muslim individuals than any of the other Middle-Eastern states, elites throughout the world are unwilling to note any difference between the two sides.

This was made all the more apparent by the decision of Presbyterian Church (USA) to pressure companies that do business with the evil Zionists, err, the state of Israel.  

James Lileks tackles this decision and scores another victory for common sense.

But they're not anti-Semites. Heavens, nay. Don't you dare question their philosemitism! No, they looked at the entire world, including countries that lop off your skull if you convert to Presbyterianism, and what did they choose as the object of their ire? A country the size of a potato chip hanging on the edge of a region noted for despotism and barbarity. By some peculiar coincidence, it happens to be full of Jews.

The right and the left seem to take turns deciding who's going to be anti-Semitic. But for some time now, the hard left in the West has led the charge against the Jews -- or, as the sleight-of-hand term has it, the Zionists.

These adolescent spirits love nothing more than a revolution, a story of a scrappy underdog rising up against a colonizing power, and the Palestinians, with their romantically masked fighters and thrilling weapon-brandishing, fit the bill. Plus, there's something so deliciously naughty and transgressive about calling Jews the new Nazis.

It doesn't matter that one side is a liberal democracy that grants rights to women and non-Jews while the other has thugs and assassins for rulers and sends its kids to summer camps where they learn the joys of good ol' fashioned Jew-killing.

There’s more where that came from.

When pressed on this matter people will often try to make the case that they’re not anti-Semitic, rather they’re simply being critical of Israel.  Well, when’s one critical faculties makes that person unable to distinguish between a democratic society and tyrannical terrorists, then it is very difficult to value the criticism offered by such individuals and groups.  And it also makes me doubt whether Israel can achieve any sort of meaningful concessions or even garner good publicity when so much of the world is so very ready to believe that they are evil incarnate.