Infantalizes the Palestinian People

Submitted by Alan Fox (United States), May 5, 2010 at 17:49

By rejecting the idea that the Palestinians are practically but not morally responsible for their predicament, Bucephalus turns them into infants, without moral agency, incapable of changing their eliminationist polity. "Practical" versus "moral" responsibility is a false dichotomy. This means that someone, anyone, will have to save the Palestinian people from themselves. They need someone else to care for them.

This is nonsense that too many people accept without question. The Palestinian rejectionism Bucephalus states is not unreasonable is in fact morally reprehensible. The Palestinians do not wish to share the land, to live with the Israelis as Jews. They do not wish to live with the Israelis as fully enfranchised citizens of a democratic state, and there is little distance from there to the fact they do not wish the Israelis to live, period. The example Bucephalus uses is absurd, as many counties are in fact seeking autonomy, including many that are not Hispanic-majority. Witness the refusal to enforce federal immigration law and establishment of "sanctuary cities" where this is trumpeted as righteous moral response to overbearing American sovereignty.

Bucephalus, unlike your example, there was no Palestinian sovereignty when Israel was created. You are claiming that this establishment entitles the Palestinians because they are not "morally" responsible for their fate, even though they are "practically" responsible for it. This is a distinction without a difference. You are merely seeking to exculpate the Palestinians for their moral failure to accept Jews as Jews and to live among them as neighbors. (Really, they are not so bad.) As long as you and your fellow travelers persist, the Palestinians will never have to accept any responsibility for their failure, moral or otherwise. And therefore, they will never achieve sovereignty. Please see Dr. Pipes' article on his proposed peace plan.

Note: Opinions expressed in comments are those of the authors alone and not necessarily those of Daniel Pipes. Original writing only, please. Comments are screened and in some cases edited before posting. Reasoned disagreement is welcome but not comments that are scurrilous, off-topic, commercial, disparaging religions, or otherwise inappropriate. For complete regulations, see the "Guidelines for Reader Comments".