Tag: Israel

  • Reality’s Eye and the Israeli/Palestine terror

    Reality’s Eye and the Israeli/Palestine terror

    Contrary to popular belief it is possible to disagree with what Israel is doing whilst continuing to care about Israel itself. Conversely, it is possible to care about Palestinians without supporting Hamas. So too, is it possible to say an entire population should not be punished for a terrorist atrocity whilst at the same time condemning terrorism. These two differences can exist in one mind and also allow us to weep for Israelis and Palestinians at the same time. 

    A great danger in our times is that instead of supporting both sides whilst condemning atrocities arising from both sides, there is a high pressure on all of us to choose an identity to support and diminish another one. We are also being pressured to let reality remain uninvestigated lest it dilute one or both identities. 

    It is of course easy to polarise. If all we allow is two categories , then all identities go in one or the other. Binary choices are ultimately simple. Too simple for reality though. 

    Binary thinking allows two kinds of descriptions but many sub-descriptions. A dead child can be a symbol, collateral damage or innocent victim. They can also become justification and deep leverage for moving us in to one of the binary camps. 

    But a child is a young person in any circumstance and every person deserves the freedom not to be a victim of intended terror. This solitary truth undermines binary descriptors and allows moral choice. This is where discernment is so important. Discernment does not require moral neutrality. A dead child is a moral condemnation on terror from any direction. No perpetrator gets away. 

    Discernment does require us not to reduce people complicated by reality into simple classifications. All such people get into the Garden of Discernment. 

    We ought to be careful about this question of whose side we are on. The more helpful question is:

    What is happening beneath the gaze of reality here? 

    If we have any value for truth and reality, our loyalty ought not be to a position we are pressed into, it ought be to the perception, as far it can be accessed, of reality’s eye.