...
Selective Outrage

Introduction

Selective Outrage

Selective outrage applies only when Israel and Jews are involved in armed conflict with Islamic Terrorist organizations. Calls for a cease-fire work in favor of the Hamas aggressor. This is true in the case of the current armed conflict in Gaza.

Potential Cease-Fire?

A cease-fire would solidify the Hamas position on the ground. This would work to re-arm the terrorists and ensure the next strike against Israel will be far worse than this one.

In other words, nothing would change in the dynamics of hate. Selective outrage is not applicable when two European nations go to war. No calls for a cease-fire or humanitarian rules of war require mentioning out loud. But when it is Jews fighting Muslim terrorist organizations the worldwide belief is Jews are at fault. They must come to the table to make peace with Hamas. Now Hamas’ mission is to create an Islamic state from the river to the sea, removing all Jews from the land, like it or not. How hard is it to wonder whose motives deserve recognition?

Hamas Attacks on Israel are the Acts of Victims and Therefore Legitimate

Selective outrage does not extend to the wonton acts of aggression practiced by Hamas or its affiliate states. The fact that they shield their combatants by using the civilians of Gaza as shields nearly guarantees the slaughter of the noncombatant residents living above the tunnels that form an underground web throughout the landscape.

Questions about the Israel-Hamas Conflict

The Israel-Hamas conflict remains a contentious and deeply complex issue in global politics. Calls for humane treatment of Gazan civilians echo around the world. It is crucial to scrutinize the selective and often biased responses that this conflict generates. This piece aims to delve deeper into the situation and highlight the persistent double standards. Explore how the world perceives the Israel-Hamas conflict but also how it deals with other international conflicts.

Selective Outrage: The Gaza Residents’ Role

In 2007, the residents of Gaza voted for Hamas to take power. While this choice certainly played a role in the ongoing conflict, it is essential to understand that the people of Gaza are a diverse group with varying opinions and vulnerabilities. Labeling them collectively as responsible for the actions of their government is overly simplistic and ignores the complex dynamics within the region. Many innocent civilians in Gaza have little say in the actions of their governing body and suffer the consequences.

In our interconnected world, where information flows freely, it is crucial to view global conflicts through a consistent and impartial lens. Selective outrage and double standards only perpetuate the cycles of violence and instability that have plagued the Middle East for decades.

The Israel-Hamas conflict is undoubtedly a complex and deeply entrenched issue, with both sides having their share of responsibility for the ongoing turmoil. Acknowledging this complexity does not absolve either party of their actions or diminish the suffering endured by innocent civilians. It calls for balance and fairness in how we assess and respond to such conflicts.

Hamas’s Strategy: Selective Outrage

Hamas’s strategy of using their citizens as human shields is morally reprehensible. This manipulation of innocent lives to shield their combatants and infrastructure is a violation of international law. However, it is equally important to acknowledge this tactic to not let it serve as a cudgel against Israel alone. The world should condemn Hamas’s actions as well, for they contribute to the perpetuation of violence in the region.

Selective Outrage: Double Standards

Comparing the Israel-Hamas conflict to historical conflicts sheds light on the inconsistent responses of the international community. In the aftermath of the attack on Pearl Harbor in 1941, no one called for the United States to cease fire. None blamed the US for the loss of ‘innocent’ Japanese civilian lives. Similarly, during the Korean and Vietnam Wars, the primary focus was on strategic objectives rather than the moral conduct of war. This stark contrast in responses raises questions about the motives behind the intense scrutiny of Israel in today’s conflict.

Russian Atrocities in Ukraine: Selective Outrage

The world often turns a blind eye to other conflicts, such as the Russian atrocities in Ukraine. With condemnations made, the global outrage and calls for immediate ceasefires are conspicuously absent. This inconsistency in responses underscores the double standards in play. In conflicts between Israel and its neighbors, combatants are held to a different moral standard than all others. This raises concerns about the motivations underlying the global scrutiny of Israel.

The Unfounded Fear of Jewish Dominance

The unique level of scrutiny and criticism faced by Israel raises suspicions of deep-rooted fears and latent antisemitism. The unfounded fear of Jewish domination persists despite a lack of evidence to support such claims. It is crucial to address and challenge these prejudices. Recognizing that Jews must not be held to a different moral standard than any other nation is a start. No more and no less.

In the international arena, the excessive focus on Israel and her ‘bad deeds’ without balancing similar acts by their enemy manifests longstanding bias. It is essential to confront the unwarranted fear of Jewish dominance and the associated antisemitism. The State of Israel must not receive different treatment than that of any other nation. Holding Israel to a higher moral standard while downplaying other conflicts undermines principles of fairness. International relations require consistent fairness in applications.

Conclusion

The Israel-Hamas conflict is a multifaceted issue with deep historical roots and complex political dynamics. Reducing it to a one-sided narrative oversimplifies the problem and does a disservice to all parties involved. To achieve a just and lasting peace in the Middle East, the international community must apply consistent standards to all conflicts and avoid selective outrage. Only when we treat all nations equally can we hope to address the challenges posed by the Israel-Hamas conflict and other global crises.

The world must learn from history and reflect on the past’s missteps. The selective outrage and finger-pointing serve to deepen the divide between nations and make finding a peaceful resolution even more challenging. It is crucial to engage in open and constructive dialogues, acknowledging the complexities of the Israel-Hamas conflict and other global crises. Only then can we hope to achieve meaningful and lasting solutions.

As the world watches the Israel-Hamas conflict and similar conflicts unfold, let us remember that our response should be driven by a commitment to justice and fairness, irrespective of the actors involved. It is only through a consistent application of our moral and ethical principles that we can aspire to build a world where peace and cooperation prevail over division and discord. The international community is responsible for setting a higher standard for itself and upholding the values of justice, equality, and humanity in all global conflicts.

By Politics-as-Usual

Roger is a retired Professor of language and literacy. Over the past 15 years since his retirement, Roger has kept busy with reading, writing, and creating landscape photographs. In this time of National crisis, as Fascist ideas and policies are being introduced to the American people and ignored by the Mainstream Press, he decided to stand up and be counted as a Progressive American with some ideas that should be shared with as many people who care to read and/or participate in discusssions of these issues. He doesn't ask anyone to agree with his point of view, but if entering the conversation he demands civility. No conspiracy theories, no wild accusations, no threats, no disrespect will be tolerated. Roger monitors all comments and email communication. That is the only rule for entering the conversation. One may persuade, argue for a different point of view, or toss out something that has not been discussed so long as the tone remains part of a civil discussion. Only then can we find common ground and meaningful democratic change.

2 thoughts on “ Selective Outrage: The Israel-Hamas Conflict via a Jewish Gaze”
  1. […] The world’s double standard toward Israel is manifest in the International response to the war…. How does the world leap from the senseless slaughter of innocent civilians at a music festival or home in a kibbutz, to Israeli aggression? Does the international response toward Israel represent a general response to terrorist-supported violence or is such a response reserved only for Israel? […]

Leave a Reply