“UNCRITICAL SUPPORT” FOR ISRAEL?

ZIONISTS ARE PATHOLOGIZED AS IRRATIONAL. AGAIN, IT’S A DIRECT PROJECTION.

Anti-Israel cranks (left) versus Zionists (right).

Uncritical support for Israel. Blind support of Israel. Unwavering support for Israel. Unbending support of Israel.

You’ve heard these terms.

This is a canard that alleges there is a rampant amount of support for Israel that is “non-critical.” The idea is that there are a whole bunch of people walking around who have some sort of reflexive support for the Jewish state based on no reasoning or rational source.

The objective is clear: to dismiss Zionism as a ridiculous position and Zionists as unthinking automatons. (Surely I don’t need to explain that anyone who supports the existence of the state of Israel is a Zionist, regardless of whatever else that word has come to be imbued with by its enemies.) The implication is that support for Israel is effectively a pathology.

There is more to it, though.

First of all, the idea that most of us who support Israel are “uncritical” is among the most laughable allegations. There is perhaps no ideology or idea in human affairs that is more vigorously debated and critically assessed than Zionism, Israel and everything associated with it. So, where does this idea of rampant “uncritical support of Israel” come from?

It is premised on a very particular, extremist position: that Israel has no right to exist. Therefore, any argument or logic that challenges this position — the very idea that Israel has a right to exist — must be irrational, by very definition. Everything that flows from this idea — for example, that Israel has a right to defend itself — is likewise dismissed as insupportable.

Someone I know once accused Jewish people who support Israel of “thinking with their blood.” I can hardly imagine a more offensive turn of phrase. Again, it pathologizes what is actually an entirely rational Jewish reaction to the world. And yet … if there is any group of people alive who have a right to “think with their blood,” as this person so crudely put it, it’s Jews.

There is no question that many Jewish people (and others, like me) believe that Israel must exist because the world is a nasty place in general and a nasty place for Jews in particular. As I have said before, the existence of a Jewish state does not preclude the possibility of another holocaust. But a Jewish country with a powerful military remains the best possible response to a world filled with Jew-hatred and a genocide wish.

Jews who are descended from survivors of the Holocaust, or Jews and non-Jews who simply understand the lessons of history, recognize the necessity of Israel to exist and to defend itself. That is not an uncritical position. That is entirely rational.

Meanwhile, let’s look at the flipside.

If you want to see the definition of “uncritical,” have a chat with a “pro-Palestinian” activist. Grab the first one you see at the screaming rally passing by your apartment building next weekend. You will probably find that they have no understanding of the terms they are chanting.

People who proudly self-identify as “anti-Zionist” might, when pressed, say that they are not suggesting Israel should cease to exist. Which means they don’t understand the definition of “anti-Zionist.”

When you ask them what “From the river to the sea” means, they will either give you a blank stare or offer some nonsense about Palestinian self-determination, which ignores the undeniable reality that it is a call for the annihilation of the Jewish state (and, depending on the speaker, the Jewish people).

They probably also can’t name the river or the sea they are referring to.

Ask them about the “genocide.” Ask them for a definition of genocide and ask them how what’s happening in Gaza fits that definition. This is Master’s level questioning, of course, which will necessarily fail, because anyone who accuses Israel of perpetrating genocide is either too stupid to understand the meaning of the term, or what’s happening in Gaza, or both.

Or they are just horrible human beings operationalizing a term that had to be invented to explain 20th-century Jewish history and weaponizing it against its victims. That is an unbelievably shitty thing to do, especially for people who imagine themselves as humanitarians, antiracists, or sensitive to the historical experiences of others.

Either way, these are not people I would recommend you engage with. It’s really not worth your energy.

You can summarize libraries of books about the conflict while your interlocutor shouts slogans like “Stop the genocide!” and “Free Palestine!” and they will still accuse you of “uncritical support for Israel.”

It is a way for ignorant and irresponsible people to justify their positions — by accusing their opponents of being ignorant and senseless, of being motivated by emotions rather than guided by rational thought. Like almost everything associated with the Palestinian movement, it is a projection.

My point is simply that, if you want a definition of “uncritical support,” look to Palestinianism.

If you want the opposite — if you want to see lively debate, intense argumentation around the ethics of national sovereignty and the treatment of minorities, the meanings and limitations of just warfare, and one of the most vibrant discourses on human morality — listen to the way supporters of Israel talk about these issues.

Because, if you think that is “uncritical support” you are not paying attention.

And that, in the end, is the problem here.

There is a great deal of “uncritical support” happening around Israel and Palestine. There is a lack of serious thinking and a triumph of mindless chanting over intellectual engagement. There is massive ignorance and fanatical clinging to misinformation and disinformation.

But it is not supporters of Israel who are guilty of these crimes against rationality.

Palestinianism is a movement that cannot stand on intellectual premises. Consider the core idea of the Palestinian movement: That the people who arrived in the land later are the indigenous people while the people who were there first are interloping imperialists.

From this foundationally indefensible premise, an entire, fanatical, uncritical global movement has emerged.

Palestinianism may be the most widespread, pervasive crusade in the world today. Given that it is premised on outright lies and is having the exact opposite of its stated aim — it is harming Palestinians and prolonging war, not helping Palestinians or ending the war — the level of incandescent rage and fanaticism it evokes can be possible only through an almost universal irrationality.

Here is what many Jewish people (and others with a sense of history) recognize in this phenomenon …

Mobs take on a power of their own. Chants become mantras. Independent, critical thinking is abandoned to the passion of the herd.

No matter how outlandish the ideology or how innocent the scapegoat, from inside the screaming mob, the hysterical seem reasonable while the reasonable seem absurd.

Today, Jewish people and their allies are standing on the sidewalk watching what seems like half the world, practically drooling with hatred and senselessness, march by screaming bloodcurdling slogans against the Jewish state.

And when we make reasonable, well-thought-out cases around our support for Israel and gently suggest that there is something a little worrisome happening in the world today, we are accused of blind, irrational and unwavering support for a cause that deserves only ferocious denigration.

But, sure. We’re the unreasonable ones.