The Question At The Root Of The Mideast Debate
Israel's Existence Is Treated As An Accepted Opinion, But It Isn't
This is probably my most unpopular opinion. I am generally pro-cancel culture.
I think it’s good for society to have some things that are considered too taboo to be accepted as a normal opinion. Yes, I understand the argument that this can become a double-edged sword, but some bigoted ideas were normal a century or two ago and are no longer accepted as legitimate opinions today, and that’s good. That is how society progresses.
One caveat: I’ve come to accept as I get older that cancel culture often does not excise toxic opinions from society, but rather pushes them underground or allows them to be cloaked by less noxious opinions. They leak out through gaslighting and obfuscation. In other words, people might still share an unacceptable opinion or viewpoint, but they will cover it up with acceptable language or deflect with more widely agreeable points.
That is part of what is happening right now with the Israel-Palestine issue. The more I listen to opinions on it, and the more I dig deeper into the 75-year history of the conflict, the more I realize where you stand depends largely on one viewpoint that has become a cancellable opinion in American society in the past few decades:
Should Israel ever have existed?
It may seem like simplifying this very complex situation too much, but I do think where you stand on the current crisis depends on how you answer that question.
If the answer to that question is “yes,” then you can’t help but examine the history in Israel’s favor. Jews had pleaded for generations for a homeland of their own to escape the persecution they endured worldwide.. In 1947, one was created by the United Nations, an international body, a means by which even Arab members of the United Nations agreed would be legitimate when they signed the UN Charter two years earlier. The state was created on land the British rightfully won by defeating the Ottomans in World War I. Whatever you feel about colonialism, the fact is they won the land in a war with another empire.
Israel was attacked on its very first day as a nation by Arab countries who rejected this legitimate means. Israel defeated the Arabs, three times, gaining land in the process, including Gaza and the West Bank. It’s long been historically accepted that if you win land in war, it is legitimately yours, especially if it is a war you did not start.
If you accept this premise, then you see the occupation or blockade of Palestinian territories as a legitimate means of Israel defending itself and even if you believe ultimately that Palestinians should have their state or are entitled to self-determination, you understand and empathize with Israel’s concern for its safety.
If your answer to the question of Israel’s existence is “no,” then you have no choice but to see every act the Arabs took from the very first one against Israel in 1948 as a legitimate act of defense of Arab land against an aggressive Western colonial force that exploited its power in the United Nations to create a settler colony in Arab land.
You see the land as rightfully belonging to the Palestinian people, who have been occupied and/or oppressed by Turks, Egyptians, and the British, and now by Israelis, and you see any act of aggression on Israel as legitimate and any act of defense on Israel’s part as illegitimate. You won’t see the actions of October 7th as an act of aggression, but rather as an act of resistance, even if you were disgusted by the brutality of them.
For a long time now, it’s been a cancellable opinion to suggest Israel should never have been created. It is widely considered an anti-Semitic opinion. Even prominent “free speech” advocates like Bari Weiss change tunes when the topic of Israel comes up. Weiss, who has made a career out of fighting cancel culture has been among the biggest critics of anti-Zionists.
Critics of anti-Zionism say that anti-Zionists believe Jews are not entitled to a homeland to call their own and should remain a subjugated society, as they had been for more than 1500 years previously. There is more nuance here; some anti-Zionists believe Jews deserve a homeland but somewhere other than Israel. The reality is whenever you create a homeland for a group of people, it is going to lead to some population being uprooted and forced to leave, so that opinion has always been dismissed as a red herring. If you don’t think Jews deserve a homeland in Israel, it is unlikely you’re going to support a nakba in Africa, Asia, or North America as well. Therefore, it is concluded that if you do not believe Jews deserve a homeland in Israel, you genuinely don’t believe they deserve it at all and should remain a diaspora at risk of persecution. As a result, we have not entertained or accepted such an opinion in a while.
There is a significant portion of society that does not believe Israel ever should have existed, has never been open about it and hides their opinions in vague notions and phrases. We are wasting our time arguing over the specifics of the current problem without talking about the root of it.
Should Pakistan even exist?
Israel exists now. The civil war in 1947 and wars in 1948, 1967, 1973, 1982, 2006, 2014, and 2023 are all attempts to relitigate the question of whether Israel should exist. How many wars do you want, how many dead is enough to settle the question for good?
The alternative, accepting Israel exists in its borders and as a Jewish state (something even Abbas cannot do), would be the beginning of a path to peace.