Orwell and Kafka in Israel/Palestine

[bluesoul]

By LAWRENCE DAVIDSON

In the last two years I have made three trips to Israel and Occupied Palestine (the West Bank and Gaza Strip). Each trip represents a journey into an approximation of the literary nightmares of George Orwell and Franz Kafka. To a certain extent we are all subject to the Orwellian version of these nightmares. It was Orwell's conviction that "political language is designed to make lies sound truthful and murder respectful." Here in the United States we ought to recognize the truth of this maxim for we have once again been drawn into deadly foreign adventures based on lies and exaggeration. However, in Israel the influence of "political language" has reached a unique level of intensity. Increasingly, many Israelis live in a "closed information environment" wherein an insidious Orwellian "newspeak" (a language of propaganda aimed at creating ideologically determined boundaries for thought), shapes thinking and perception relative to the Palestinians. This is just not true of ! your average citizen manipulated by mendacious politicians and a censured press. In Israel, as in Orwell's novel 1984, society's leaders are as shaped by the prevailing "political language" as those they rule. Thus, descriptions of Palestinians by Israeli leaders range from "there are no such thing as Palestinians" (Prime Minister Golda Maier, June 15, 1969), to "beasts walking on two legs" (Prime Minister Menahim Begin, June 25, 1982), to "drugged cockroaches in a bottle" (Raphael Eitan, Chief of Staff, April 14, 1983), to "people who do not belong to our continent, to our world, but actually belong to a different galaxy (Israeli President Moshe Katsav, May 10, 2001). For a man like Prime Minister Ariel Sharon, "peace" for Israel comes through dominating and controlling "the enemies of humanity" (January 5, 2004). Oppression and war making becomes peace making in the land of Zion.

With the Palestinians, on the other hand, the use of language is much more descriptive of their reality. Just about every Palestinian has been negatively impacted by the Israeli occupation, and thus no propaganda can hide the truth from them. Any politician, of whatever nationality, who tries to tell the Palestinians that the Israelis have their best interests at heart and are in "Judea and Samaria" to raise Arab standards of living, introduce progress, and otherwise help the Palestinians into the modern world (all claims made by Zionists in the last 50 years) would be laughed at and thoroughly despised. Thus, deceptive language that substitutes for reality, is not what defines the world of those in Occupied Palestine. Instead, the particular nightmare of the Palestinians is best described in the pages of Franz Kafka. In Kafka's world the prevailing theme is uncertainty and unpredictability. There are no set rules for behavior and the orders given by authorities se! em arbitrary and even contradictory. You do not know what the laws are. The "authorities" in Kafka's work sit in their fortresses and periodically intrude upon the lives of the confused and apparently helpless protagonists.



<snip>

Source: http://www.counterpunch.org/davidson04032004.html

[elsaamo]

1. Uh,

Well, to begin with, I find any endeavor trying to compare the propoganda services or lack thereof of two people to be rathur absurd and futile. Imagine if one tried to compare the same efforts on the part of the americans and Arabs on the eve of the Iraq war, an event about which, I am sure, that no matter your political leanings you recognize that at least some spin was done.

More specifically to this article, I was very impressed by the author's excellent research on random and tragic comments made by Israeli leaders, but I must say his research was "lacking" if he could not find a similarly illustrious list. I am not so indurstrious that I would take upon myself to construct such a list, but a more talented person might choose to begin with Chairman Arafat's speech to the United Nations carrying a gun, the only person ever to do that. He might also glance at some of Arafat's other charming comments in which he admtted to being a terrorist (this was, admittedly, at least 2 decades ago, but nonetheless interesting), and if this person were to even more energetic, if such a thing were possible, he might find it interesting reading to research all of the pithy statements made by the heads of other groups like Hamas and Hizbollah, which at least one poll says is supported by a majority of Palistineans.

Or, I suppose, such a person who I am CERTAIN wishes only to be unbiased and defend both sides might find himself understandably winded after finding 6 sentences by Israeli leaders, and instead deacide "With the Palestinians, on the other hand, the use of language is much more descriptive of their reality." Ahh. the inspiring thing about this sentence, which I am certain will light the imagination to all future spin-doctors and propgandists out there is that the only way to contest this line is, apparently, to contest reality. Luckily, though, I am certain we have a web-site here iflled with Democrats, who should be able to easily find the crack between his specific research on the Israeli side, and his broad but beautiful language on the Palistinean side.

Just for the record, I am also appalled by his reading of Franz Kafka. Anybody who reads Kafka and whose mind does not immediatly go to the Holocaust has never read a modern history book, and only raises the question of how these thoughts must have screwed that brilliant author's mind. Israel has done alot of things it shouldn't be proud of, and it still does way too many of them. But to argue that Israel's actions are close to anything described in Kafka or in books about the holocaust are simply absurd. Considering I've gone on this tangent, I might as well conclude it- I honestly don't care much about what happens with the West Bank and gaza Strip. If the Palistineans want it, let them have it, and make it into a state, a brothel, or a football stadium (prefferably for the Giants to leave the country, but that's just personal bias). I'm all in favor of that, and to be entirely honest, most moderate Israelis agree. Here's where the agreement ends- Israel must survive. This cannot be a question, it cannot be an issue for the simply reason that if it does not, then the most serious human rights issue since, and I hate to use this term as it is so loaded, but being true, I will nonetheless, the Holocaust. One million Jews were in the Arab countries prior to 1948- 10,000 are now. The Palistinean population in West bank and Gaza Strip, on the other hand, grew by fifty percent. There are 5 or however many million Jews in Israel. If it collapses, we will hopefully have that many refugees, but perhaps not. My only hope is that future generation on the reading of Kafka, think only of Adolf Hitler.

[ex_jew]

2. Did South Africa "survive" the end of apartheid ?

And it's a better place (in some ways at least) now.

Does wearing a gun while speaking at the UN or anywhere else make one's remarks Orwellian (or Kafkaesque) ? Violence and the threat of violence is one thing. Propaganda and the destruction of language as a vehicle for understanding reality is another, and to my mind far worse.

Congratulations on your honesty in admitting that you don't care what happens with the West Bank or Gaza. As it happens, however, the original occupants of those areas do care, and it might be wise for you to take their concerns seriously.

[elsaamo]

3. I'm glad that you take such interest in teh integrity of language

that you are willing to read what you will into what I say. My point was that I, as a non-resident of the West Bank, my views on that location are of no worth, as are yours. If they want a state, s obe it. If they want something else, that's also their right. Similarly, if the British decide they would prefer not a state, but an Alien retention facility, that is their right.

I noticed you still did not respond to my main point, which was that everybody can agree that neither side is perfect, and the inability by the author that recognize this by his one-sided and fawning language suggests a problem.

[ex_jew]

6. As to your main point...

having dozens of tanks storm through your city in search of insurgents is a taste of reality that is un-mediated by propaganda. No tanks are rolling through Israeli cities. Israelis can only learn what life is like under IDF oppression by looking at the media (if they choose to). It's a different situation.

Sorry if I misunderstood your lack of concern about the West Bank. You say the residents should decide what they want. Would this mean taking a vote on whether the settlers should be expelled ?

[elsaamo]

7. I would suggest

we try not to enter the question of which people has suffered more, as I am sure we can both summon some extraordinarily fantastic writers to defend our case on whether it is better to be a Palistinean or an Israeli who walks each day out of his house not knowing if he was safer from people who he had no problem with in there, or on the street, or in the car, does he fight an unnamed enemy with whom he has never met, nor will he probably.

But that wasn't ym main point, either. He claimed that Israelis were launching propoganda by virtue at looking at what the leaders said. If so, I merely mentioned that perhaps one might want to look at that which some other people have said, notably some famed Palistinean leaders.

Everybody, including Sharon, by the way, but that's another issue, agrees that the settlers eventually have to go. As to he question of whether they should have astate or not, is up to the Palistineans and the other forces in the world.

I have another question for you. Some have guessed that Sharon's plan is to unilaterally retreat from everything and pull back behind the Security Fence. He would effectively tell the Palistineans to do whatever they want, and Israel will never enter a Palistinean city (unless, of course, if war were declared). The complaints of the Palistineans and of yours would seem to be answered. Would you be in favor of such a plan?

[ex_jew]

13. Yes, I would like to what real dis-engagement brings.

[bluesoul]

4. You claim to be "unbiased" here

LOL reading your post, your firmly pro-Israeli...

[elsaamo]

5. Oh, I'm not unbiased

and I'm sorry if I allowed myself to be misinterpeted in claiming that I was. It's interesting, though, that you call me pro-Israel, which perhaps I am, I'm not sure, but I know why you think so, as that is the side which I have shown here today. I have thought a bit on the topic and here is more or less what I have decided I think.

I think Israel needs to exist as a human rights issue as I have mentioned above. The right of return is a weak argument, but I suppose I'd be willing to give them something in exchange for their troubles, which are, of course, real, though not as real as some people claim, I suspect, but to allow them back into Israel and to retake the land is simply impossible. I liked the Barak-Clinton peace plan of 2000, was it, or at least the principles involved (in that the Palistineans get virtually all of the West Bank and Gaza Strip, though some, unfortunately, it really impossible to give (right next to Israel proper is a massive school, which is logistically impossible to move). I think Israel has done quite a few things it shouldn't be proud of, and I don't think it is, and I would be strong;y in favor of them fixing it. That being said, I can understand WHY they do it, but nonetheless, they should and need to find a better way to try preventing terrorism.

Maybe I am pro-Israel, I'm not sure, but nonetheless, I am certainly biased in favor of whomever I am in favor, and did not mean to claim otherwise. that does not, though, change the fact that that article is openly biased and does not even try ot present a nuanced view of the situation.

[tinnypriv]

8. "Virtually all the West Bank and Gaza"

Consult a map.

[elsaamo]

9. Sorry, I'm not very good in maps

I never did too well in understanding them. I'm just wondering though, can you deal with words and numbers, because maybe that would be a nice fair ground on which we can deal with. CNN, that ultra-conservative news channel, said that "Another proposal was said to put 97 percent of the West Bank under Palestinian control." http://www.cnn.com/2000/WORLD/meast/12/26/mideast.05/

Please explain to me how I do not know how to read letters or numbers.

[tinnypriv]

10. Another "proposal" was "said"....

Hence, unofficial. Therefore, pointless to comment on it.

If you insist, the "97" percent figure (or "95", the number fluctuates in hasbara) is contradicated by Barak himself.

In addition, as anyone sane knows, to evaluate a proposal seriously you have to have a map. Which is the reason why every land-based agreement in history has included one.

This one didn't - which is why any percentage stated as being "offered" in the context of Camp David is worth ridiculing and dismissing with contempt.

As you'd discover if you took the advice and consulted a map.

[elsaamo]

11. I'm sorry, but I think CNN has fairly good maps

If their best interpertation is 95-97%, then I would ask for you to present an equally strong source saying that it is a different amount of territory.

[tinnypriv]

12. "CNN has fairly good maps"

Which is of course irrelevant.¹

I have good maps, and so does my local shop. That's irrelevant as well, since none has a map of the "offer" of Barak. Understandable - one doesn't exist.

In any case, a question: "95-97" is their "interpretation" of what, exactly? An oral "offer"? Agreement draft? Word of mouth?

Clarify please.

Repeat: no "interpretation" can be taken seriously without a map of that interpretation.

-----

1. If it wasn't irrelvant, you could be directed to the map-reading abilities of CNN, as demonstrated last week during "News Hour" with Aaron Brown. 3 minutes into the show, a correspondent gave a to-camera report from "Gaza, Israel". Perhaps some tzahal kids can be forgiven for not knowing that some Palestinian areas aren't in Israel (which often happens), but you'd expect different from a news organisation that has to pass through an Israeli military checkpoint just to get to the strip.