Thank you, Alan, for sending us the link to the Chris Hedges interview of Middle Eastern scholar
Norman Finkelstein.
Yes, Finkelstein makes a valid and important argument. He describes the conditions in Gaza since 2006: a blockade and economic strangulation punctuated by period massacres. And he maintains that the Gazans were so driven by desperation that the moral judgments that normally would be invoked against the killing of civilians ought not be applied in the case of the October 7 attack by Hamas. I can accept this argument.
For his part, in support of Finklestein’s argument, Hodges points out the periodic episodes of mass killings by the oppressed, driven by desperation, revenge, and martyrdom. On the other hand, I have been struck by the extent to which anti-colonial leaders of the Third World have pushed back against the natural desire for revenge and called for cooperation in the construction of a more just world.
Finklestein and Hodges proceed from a vantage point that implicitly divides the world between good and bad people, with the latter category formed by colonizers, imperialists, and racists; and the former group consisting of the victims of colonialism, imperialism, and racism, who are believed justified in revenge. This frame invariably leads to political conflict in the nations of the Global North, because of the large number of people who, on the basis of their experiences, do not accept its premises.
I think we need a different frame of reference, which stresses the common humanity of all. A framework that sees conquest and domination as central to the human condition and the human story, occurring whenever the desire for wealth and power is not checked by other desires and by religious, philosophical and moral convictions. In this alternative framework, the modern phenomenon of European conquest, colonialism, settlement, imperialism, and racism is seen as the modern expression of a historic human tendency toward economic development forged on the basis of conquest.
The leaders of the Global South today emphasize the centrality of colonialism and imperialism in defining their current reality. However, they at the same time stress the common need of humanity to set aside its historic tendency toward conquest and competition, and to find solutions to problems on the basis of cooperation. Seeking a solution that addresses the needs of all with respect to Palestine, the leaders of the Global South stress the need for the mobilization of a global political will in support of the two-state solution, with the pre-1967 borders and with the capital in East Jerusalem. Their position is repeatedly reaffirmed in the declarations of the Non-Aligned Movement and the G77 plus China.
This is a beautiful statement. This is what patriotism means, love for one's country and hoping it will take steps to be on the right side of history and help broker a deal for the weak and vulnerable.
thank you, Chuck. Finklestein takes it a step further, claiming that he cannot make moral judgement on Hamas actions. It's quite convicting for me: https://open.substack.com/pub/chrishedges/p/the-chris-hedges-report-with-professor?utm_source=share&utm_medium=android&r=k83nl
Thank you, Alan, for sending us the link to the Chris Hedges interview of Middle Eastern scholar
Norman Finkelstein.
Yes, Finkelstein makes a valid and important argument. He describes the conditions in Gaza since 2006: a blockade and economic strangulation punctuated by period massacres. And he maintains that the Gazans were so driven by desperation that the moral judgments that normally would be invoked against the killing of civilians ought not be applied in the case of the October 7 attack by Hamas. I can accept this argument.
For his part, in support of Finklestein’s argument, Hodges points out the periodic episodes of mass killings by the oppressed, driven by desperation, revenge, and martyrdom. On the other hand, I have been struck by the extent to which anti-colonial leaders of the Third World have pushed back against the natural desire for revenge and called for cooperation in the construction of a more just world.
Finklestein and Hodges proceed from a vantage point that implicitly divides the world between good and bad people, with the latter category formed by colonizers, imperialists, and racists; and the former group consisting of the victims of colonialism, imperialism, and racism, who are believed justified in revenge. This frame invariably leads to political conflict in the nations of the Global North, because of the large number of people who, on the basis of their experiences, do not accept its premises.
I think we need a different frame of reference, which stresses the common humanity of all. A framework that sees conquest and domination as central to the human condition and the human story, occurring whenever the desire for wealth and power is not checked by other desires and by religious, philosophical and moral convictions. In this alternative framework, the modern phenomenon of European conquest, colonialism, settlement, imperialism, and racism is seen as the modern expression of a historic human tendency toward economic development forged on the basis of conquest.
The leaders of the Global South today emphasize the centrality of colonialism and imperialism in defining their current reality. However, they at the same time stress the common need of humanity to set aside its historic tendency toward conquest and competition, and to find solutions to problems on the basis of cooperation. Seeking a solution that addresses the needs of all with respect to Palestine, the leaders of the Global South stress the need for the mobilization of a global political will in support of the two-state solution, with the pre-1967 borders and with the capital in East Jerusalem. Their position is repeatedly reaffirmed in the declarations of the Non-Aligned Movement and the G77 plus China.
wow, this is excellent, Chuck.
I'm thankful for your prolific aptitude!
on the run at the moment.
alan
Thank you for your attention to these questions and issues.
This is a beautiful statement. This is what patriotism means, love for one's country and hoping it will take steps to be on the right side of history and help broker a deal for the weak and vulnerable.
Yes, thank you.