How we talk about Israel at Wesleyan University is not a local, insignificant squabble. It is not words. It raises questions about the misuse of history and the abuse of language in a community of learning supposedly dedicated to critical thought. The “Activism 102” conference of February 7th and the debates that followed reveal a deeply worrisome disregard of facts as well as a distortion of political discourse to suit the needs of those who would vilify the right of the Jewish people to a sovereign state in the Middle East.
To label Israel as an “apartheid” state represents a willful distortion of historical context.
It is to lift one politically charged expression out of the concrete history of racial discrimination in Africa. This misused idea becomes a way to besmirch a democratic society. Far from being a racist country, Israel is the only state in the Middle East to guarantee genuine freedom of religion for all—s well as the civil rights of gay people. To acknowledge this accomplishment would have complicated the “Activism: workshop dedicated to unilateral condemnation of Zionism and Israel’s right to exist.
This intentional distortion of a complex political situation calls to mind the abuse of language that characterized political mobilization in China under Mao Zedong. There, too, Red Guards were egged on by political elders eager to settle political scores. In order to make young students acts in thoughtless ways they had to label the enemies as ”ox monsters“ and ”snake spirits.“ Caricaturing the ”enemy“ is a favorite strategy of those who want to promote radical action at all costs.
It is not surprising , then, that one of the ”dollar bills“ available at the ”Activism“ conference showed President Bush wearing a tie covered by swastikas. Again, as with Communist Party members in China who were falsely accused of being ”running dogs“ of the imperialism, a distorted history is used to tarnish the image of a political leader deemed objectionable by some. No one bothered to speak at the February workshops about the anti- Semitism that led to the rise of Nazi Germany. It sufficed, for the purpose of political mobilization, to suggest that the American president is as bad as an ill understood Hitler.
To make matters worst, Israel was directly linked to the September 11th terrorism attacks. The same ”dollar bill“ that vilified the President of the United States showed the Mosad as one of the intelligence agencies responsible for the disaster. How do victims of political violence come to be portrayed as perpetrators of atrocity? By lifting images and language out of a specific historical context to make it synonymous with an all too general indictment of ”evil.“
If this had been a workshop on women and violence, no one would have dared to blame the victims for the actions of the rapist. Yet, when the subject is Israel, it seems that criteria of fair-mindedness are abandoned. The swastika is wrenched out of its murderous context to create a climate of hatred toward the American government and toward Israel. This is not political art. It is propaganda at its worst.
Claiming to fight Israeli aggression, the ”Activism“ workshop in fact provided a forum for the covert advocacy of violence. The ”International Solidarity Movement"— major participant in the February 7th conferenc—presented itself as an organization for the “peaceful change” in the Middle East. In fact, however, the IMS office in Jenin was discovered to provide cover and refuge for Islamic Jiha—n organization dedicated to the violent, wholesale destruction of the state of Israel. Again, where facts should have prevailed, propaganda won out.
In China under Mao universities were also used to score political points, to thwart the process of critical reflection. Wesleyan need not sink into that morass. Yet, as a a follow up to “Activism 102,” a demonstration was staged to depict the “evils” of checkpoints in Israel. Our own Argus rightly pointed out that such actions create a black and white picture intended to erase the grays that constitute the stuff of critical reflection. Nowhere in the checkpoint propaganda was there any mention of why Israel had to resort to this strategy as part of its self defense against repeated attacks on innocent citizens in coffee shops, bus stops and schools. No reference was made in the demonstration to the most recent murders at the Gaza checkpoint on January 14t—hen Reem Al-Reyashji, a 22 year old mother of two blew herself up killing four Israelis and injuring ten. She was loaded with ammunition meant to harm many more in the heart of Israel. She was stopped just in time Refusing to go through the metal detector, she claimed to have had leg surgery that left her with a metal plate. One of the Israeli guards was moved by the young woman’s pleas and took her aside. He was one of those killed.
Words and ideas taken out of context create a fabric of deceit. Is there a way to become more responsible in our use of language? To do morean justice to historical context? Perhaps we can borrow a strategy from an expression used by scholars in traditional China: shi ji shi ye, shi zheng y—“history records facts , thereby it rectifies the record of the past.“ At Wesleyan, too, we have the opportunity to rectify the record of the past. Ours is an ideal setting for making careful distinctions. We can use the resources of our community not to spew hate but to promote thought.