Em-Pathetic

In this next article in my ongoing series regarding world support for Hamas in Gaza, I will address why Hamas has been extremely effective in its use of media and why rational people are mobilized to respond to the 'plight' of the Gazans but unmoved by missiles raining down on Israeli civilians. Civilians and children are unfortunate, inevitable, collateral damage of all wars. Every nation knows this and no nation is as careful as Israel in avoiding the unavoidable while at the same time having its own civilian population under constant threat of deadly rockets. So, again, why is the world moved by broadcast images emerging from Gaza but not Israel?




I am struck by the radically different videos coming out of Gaza compared to Israel. From Gaza, images and video purportedly show injured and maimed children or mothers crying out at the devastation around. Contrast this to videos of Israelis in bunkers smiling, taking selfies or groups of soldiers singing am yisrael chai. I am struck by my wife and then by videos of Gazan militants fiercely denouncing "the occupation", the "genocide", "human rights violations", "war crimes," etc. Contrast this with the calm, rational responses of Netanyahu and Israeli spokesmen explaining in intricate detail all of the extreme efforts to avoid hurting non-combatants (yawn).



Again, I have to open my ape-bible to understand human beings. In 'Our Inner Ape', by Frans De Waal, he describes empathy and the empathetic response as "one of the strongest [emotions] there is...stronger than the ape's proverbial desire for bananas." Empathy is the intellectual identification with or vicarious experiencing of the feelings, thoughts, or attitudes of another- (dictionary.com).



De Waal's writes, "We celebrate rationality, but when push comes to shove we assign it little weight. As any parent who has tried to talk sense into a teenager knows, the persuasive power of logic is surprisingly limited. This is especially true in the moral domain...Moral decision-making is driven by emotions...we are equipped with an internal compass that tells us how we ought to treat others. Rationalizations often come after the fact, when we have already carried out the preordained reactions of our species...Evolution has equipped us with genuinely cooperative impulses and inhibitions against acts that might harm the group on which we depend."



When we see others in pain, we empathetically feel that pain in our gut. Instinctively, immediately, we have sympathy towards the sufferer and desire to offer consolation. We also have strong impulses to then punish the one who inflicted this pain with which we empathize. These tendencies are and were critical for the success of humans (and some other primates) in groups.



Notice the buzz words used by the Gazans already mentioned above. Every single one evokes a visceral response against those who would have the audacity to do such a thing to another human being. Reporters feel empathy and respond with moral indignation in their tone and speech, thereby spreading the empathy globally via their networks. In essence they are unwittingly complicit in a empathy-fest. Yet the rational discourse coming out of Israel explaining, 'they attack Israel with rockets and are committed to the elimination of the Jewish state,' may all be true but that really doesn't strike a cord nearly as deep. Israel needs to show videos of children and old ladies screaming in terror while running for cover as the sirens go off, show the injuries and bodies of people killed by rockets. Their rhetoric must be desperate like that of the Gazans.



Getting the picture yet? Images of pain and suffering coming out of Gaza win de facto. They activate a person's empathetic system immediately. To expect people to start to understand, why, who, context or rationalize is already too late in the process and frankly asking a lot of mere mortals. And that's why every time Israel justifiably wins at war, it really loses as well.

Going Ape-Sh**

I have been trying to understand the overwhelming and vociferous support for Hamas and other radical Islamic jihadists in the face of clear evidence of their outright goals of destroying Israel & western civilization. I could link to articles quoting the Koran or videos of their leadership calling for destruction of the west or videos of Palestinians celebrating the fall of the twin towers or I could show deadly assaults on Christians and churches, but my goal today isn't to establish right and wrong or who started but as I said, to understand WHY the world community backs such vicious violent organizations. For Islamists and antisemites the answer is easy but what about seemingly rational people?




Frans De Waal's book, Our Inner Ape, is a fascinating read on understanding all sorts of emotions, motivations, and actions as manifested in our closest cousins the apes (specifically the chimps and bonobos). In one chapter that dealt with violence and conflict resolution, he describes how a beta will often redirect his own aggression towards a weaker target in hopes that the alpha will join him in a common cause. Although quite bad for the gamma target, the two big dangerous competitors achieve a form of detente. This process is mostly subconscious (just as the guy who was criticized at work takes out his aggression on his wife when he gets home). This is in essence, scapegoating and is very effective in calming tensions among dominants in the hierarchy. De Waal's claims "...scapegoating is one of the most basic, most powerful, least conscious psychological reflexes of the human species..."



I propose the same mechanism is at work here. The world is very much afraid of the alpha, radical Islam, with all the violence it has already perpetrated and continues to espouse. Reflexively, the world supports their activity or in the very least, strongly restrains its criticism in order to appease them and appear as their ally. Wishful thinking and blind delusion drives the world to join in common cause against the gamma, Israel, the scapegoat. In their limited view, as long as Radical Islam is focused on Jews, the betas of the world are safe; tensions between dominants alleviated.



Severely miscalculating the dangers that radical Islam poses for them, the world is swept along blindly. But Radical Islam is very devout and very focused and well armed. They WILL rise to threaten western civilization. They have a goal and are willing to kill and die for it. So if you condone their actions against the Jews or join in scapegoating, don't be surprised when terror spreads beyond Jewish targets to you and your land. And don't be surprised when the doorbell rings signaling it's your turn to be commanded, "Convert or die!"

Lot's Wife A-Salted

Rebecca Goldstein wrote an article, "Looking Back at Lot's Wife." In it she describes her wrestling with the implication of Lot's wife 'punishment.' Is it due to her taking voyeuristic interest in the destruction of others? Was she punished for being skeptical about God's planned destruction and was thus struck down? Was it a lesson to what happens to us when we take stupid, unnecessary risks? Was it nostalgia for loss of the life she knew? None of these provide satisfactory answers why she deserved to die as a pillar of salt.




Rebecca quotes Rabbi David Kimchi (aka Radak) who points out that in Duetoronomy, Moses describes the destruction as sulfur and salt (rather than the sulfur and fire in Genesis). So in Radak's understanding, the land of Sodom was laid waste as sulfur and its people as salt. So in essence, Lot's wife shared a common fate with the Sodomites. This begs the question once again as to why she died.



Rebecca offers a unique perspective, one which spoke to me as a parent (but I can see it having less effect on a non-parent). Recall that Lot had 2 married daughters who remained behind with their husbands who scoffed at the news of impending destruction. So Lot's wife (aka Irit, in legends) is essentially leaving 2 of her 4 daughters behind.



"Irit looked back to see if her two firstborn daughters were following, and she saw that they weren't and what had become of them.

"In such a moment of grief one knows only one desire: to follow after one's child, to experience what she's experienced, to be one with her in every aspect of suffering. Only to be one with her.

"And it was for this desire that Irit was turned into a pillar of salt. She was turned into salt either because God couldn't forgive her for this desire...or because he could."