The Grand Illusion
Despite both George Santayana and Winston Churchill declaring that those who fail to learn the lessons of history are doomed to repeat them, most people really don’t learn anything from history. They’re more inclined to agree with Henry Ford, who declared, “History is more or less bunk.”
Not only that, but even when they’re faced with great horrors, unless it affects them, most people are inclined to do nothing.
In the time of Hitler, most Germans did nothing to oppose the death camps that killed millions of Jews and others classed as “undesirable” by the Nazis. Neither did most Poles or most French people. Americans, for the most part, ignored the genocide, at least until Germany was defeated.
Few if any Turks did anything to oppose the killing of Armenians, and many Turks still deny that genocide. The list of genocides is long, and most people know about only a small fraction, if that, unless they have personal, familial, or cultural experience.
Hitler’s death camps weren’t the first or only time Jewish people were threatened. Pogroms were common in Russia from the second half of the nineteenth century well into the twentieth century. Some of the bloodiest pogroms took place in England in the late twelfth century, which culminated with Edward I issuing an Edict of Expulsion that removed all Jews from England and forbid their presence until it was effectively revoked in the 1650s.
Given more than two thousand years of attacks and persecution, and given that history shows that almost no one steps up to prevent genocide, although there’s often futile handwringing and a great deal of tears [many of them of the crocodile variety] after the fact, is it any wonder that Israel has reacted as it has?
Exactly what is Israel supposed to do? Be “lenient” and give Hamas yet another chance, when all of Hamas and the majority of Palestinians seek Israel’s total destruction?
Too many of those condemning Israeli tactics have forgotten or never learned that defeating someone who wants to destroy you is anything but bloodless. Among the forgotten or ignored knowledge is the fact that over 600,000 German civilians, including 75,000 children, died from allied bombing in the effort to defeat Hitler, and, back then, Americans certainly weren’t bemoaning German civilian deaths when “American boys” were dying for their country. Or is it somehow different when “Israeli boys and girls” are dying for theirs?
To accompany your post I would suggest people read:
How responsible is the average Russian for Putin’s war?
BY ALEXANDER J. MOTYL, OPINION CONTRIBUTOR – 12/04/23 The Hill
https://thehill.com/opinion/international/4341360-how-responsible-is-the-average-russian-for-putins-war/
Specifically noting the phrase in the penultimate paragraph and its significance to us in the US.
Israel is certainly fully justified to respond militarily to the Hamas attacks.
Unfortunately, recent history has shown that Israel is doomed to suffer repeated attacks. Perhaps there’s no alternative, and Israel is following the best possible policy. I certainly don’t have a magic wand to wave for a solution.
But if Israel doesn’t want to suffer repeated attacks, then I guess Israel could learn from history and try something different.
Well said, Postagoras.
Calls for a ‘cease-fire’ really mean nothing more than for Israel to stop attacking, since there is no conceivable pledge on Hamas’ part that they would feel remotely bound to honor. But the fact remains that both the people of Israel and the people of Gaza have been badly betrayed by their leadership, and nothing can possibly be resolved until those leaders are removed by their respective populations.
Appeasement didn’t work in the 1930s. There is no evidence to think it would work now. I would submit that there is copious evidence to think it would make the situation worse.
Prosecuting a war (and it is war, not a police action, not a limited engagement, or skirmish) is not a time for half measures. Half measures have caused many of the problematic situations the US has experienced (and is still experiencing) in Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, and Korea.
Sorry, the choice isn’t between war or appeasement. So your rah rah for war doesn’t help the conversation at all.
The problem isn’t just winning the war, it’s also winning the peace. Germany was beaten and broken after WWI but the onerous Treaty of Versailles laid the foundation for WWII. The Allies didn’t want to lose the peace again, and the Marshall Plan was born. The Allies learned from history and did something new. And thank goodness, it worked.
Somewhere out there, there’s a creative person who could come up with the spark that motivates the folk in the Middle East to depose the leaders who keep getting them killed.
Maybe future generations will give thanks for the Wine Guy Plan.
But the unmentioned point behind even your statement is that you can’t fix a bad system unless you break it totally and rebuild from scratch, or the same bad guys will just try again under a different name. So long as the ideology in Gaza/Palestine is “Israel must be destroyed” the problems will persist. The Russians never got rid of “the strong man is the only way” idea, and all Russia’s had for five hundred years, if not longer, is a series of despots.
“… The unmentioned point behind even your statement is that you can’t fix a bad system unless you break it totally and rebuild from scratch, or the same bad guys will just try again under a different name…”
“History belongs above all to the active and powerful man,” Nietzsche proclaims—like Schiller or Goethe who view the past as a model for inspiration, not merely to imitate, but as an “incentive to do as others have done and do it better” (UB II, 2, KSA 1, 259).
There are many lessons and much advice offered by history, and it is easy to pick and choose what you want. The past can be used for almost anything you want to do in the present. We abuse History when we create lies about the past or write histories that show only one perspective.
So, the need to destroy utterly and rebuild might be interpreted in a bad way; such as what Rome did to Carthage, Hitler tried to do to Jews, and what Trump and others in the US are trying to do to the US.
Whether or not total destruction of Hamas is possible is arguable. The ideology they spout is not destructible but is replaceable. That cannot be achieved by the scorched earth policies used by warlords of the past nor the warlords of the present.
My point was about the system supporting the ideology. No ideology is destroyed until all those believing it are dead, but ideologies can be minimized. There are still Nazis in the world, but the Germany that supported it is gone. There are still monarchists, but most European countries have minimized or removed monarchies, and in a great many countries it took considerable force and change of systems. Generally speaking, it would appear that change requires force of some sort, and often great force in the case of deeply held ideologies or beliefs. Offhand, I can’t think of a major change in government anywhere that didn’t take considerable force, either of moderate force continuing over time, or more extreme force over less time.
What system supports Hamas?
The tunnels under Gaza: can be destroyed (no Zionist lives in the buildings on top). Administration of Gaza is more difficult but in the short term – Martial Law (the whining of the international community can be ignored). Make the Palestinian enclaves all part of Israel and deport those unwilling to follow its laws rather than jailing them? Much too costly!
75 years of “brilliance” in government has resulted in half-hearted and non-compliance of agreements by both sides and assassination of those who would “appease”. Hitler, Stalin, Xi, Khamenei and now even Modi would have an answer as to what to destroy and how. Maybe Netanyahu does have the solution.
Hi,
Iam so disappointed to read an author I have followed present a one sided view. What about the zionist acts that initiated the creation of the state of Israel the Palestinians are being treated by Israel in the same way as they were by their oppressors. They are brothers the problem is also that Israel is ethnically cleansing Palestinians under the pretext of protecting themselves. In your book you promote people taking a balanced view not demonising peoples
Exactly where did the Jews and Zionists have to go? While I certainly don’t agree with much of what Netanyahu has done, the bottom line remains that there isn’t any other halfway safe place for Jews as a people anywhere else in the world. The nations where they would be safe can’t and won’t absorb that many of them. In addition, almost all the Arab nations are using the Palestinians as a tool against Israel and have for years while bankrolling all the terrorists wanting to destroy Israel.
What exactly — and in concrete and workable terms — do you expect of Israel that won’t endanger its people even more and that would be acceptable to the surrounding countries?
In concrete terms – Israel borders as originally defined should be respected by Israel itself as well as those who objected to its existence. Then the UN and/or US should be mandated to protect those borders so that peaceful equitable solutions can be found.
The question is not where is Israel to go as it is a sovereign state with originally clearly defined borders it is Where are the Palestinians supposed to go? *NOT* every Palestinian is a person to be summarily executed as a terrorist in answer to your question.
If you substitute Palestine for Israel exactly the same treatment that we abhor when targeted at Israel has been targeted at the Palestinians.
We should not continue to accept the tired argument that we need to defend our borders with punitive strikes human lives are the same whether taken by a terrorist/freedom fighter or a state sanctioned army.
Hamas murdering human beings vs Israel killing human beings and calling it collateral damage there is no difference lives are lost.
Otherwise the cycle of violence will continue to spiral until either every last Palestinian is eliminated (which seems to be the current unachievable approach) or the people of Israel ask their elected leaders to not continue with this approach which only generate more converts to the Hamas cause but to work towards solutions which respect the right of both peoples to live in reasonable and safe conditions with the same prospects “to have a future”.
The UK government tackled similar issues when dealing with the IRA back in the day so it is possible.
All very well and good, except for a few “little” problems. First, you’re requiring the U.S. or the U.N. to protect the Israeli borders, and that’s a healthy chunk of money, and it would drag U.S. troops into another war situation. That won’t fly in the U.S., and I doubt it will in the U.N.
Also, the Israelis, for all of their considerable faults, in recent years, haven’t been the ones making punitive strikes; the various Arab/Muslim terrorist groups have been consistently firing rockets into Israel, and I’m unaware of any recent Israeli military operation on the scale as that of the Hamas attack.
You’re also overlooking the fact that Hamas — and the vast majority of Palestinians — are committed to destroying Israel.
Will the cycle of violence continue? It likely will because the Israelis can’t accept the destruction of Israel, and the Palestinians and many, if not most, of their supporters and all of Hamas, cannot accept the existence of Israel… and Egypt won’t allow the Palestinians to go elsewhere.
The IRA situation was vastly different because it involved two nations, the leadership of both wanting to find a solution, and the ocean borders of Ireland and the U.K., minimized outside interference.
OK how do you suggest the problem should be addressed given I cannot know how many Palestinians actually wish to live in the circumstances they do rather a safer existence alongside a secure Israel you given your writings are aware that the majority of all peoples want a safe life for their families.
The vast majority of Palestinians are Sunni Muslims. Egypt and Saudi Arabia also have Sunni cultures, and both are nearby. Neither apparently wants to take in the Palestinians, but instead to use them against Israel. The simplest and safest solution would be to allow Palestinians into either country. Gaza was part of Egypt on and off for centuries, and from roughly 1820 to 1917 was ruled by Egypt. From 1917 to 1948, it was part of British-controlled Palestine. From 1948 to 1967, Egypt administered it. Considering that Gaza was largely controlled by Egypt for most of its history, it’s not exactly far-fetched that the Palestinians could be assimilated into Egypt. The Jews have nowhere else nearby where they could go. That’s not true of the Palestinians.
This could work, but it likely won’t because none of the Muslim powers in the Mideast appear to want peace if it means recognizing the permanent existence of Israel.