Let’s All Become BDSHoles!

In the past, I’ve riffed of what it would take for us to truly turn the tables on Israel’s foes and treat them in the same way they treat us.  But today, I’d like to dig deeper and fully list out everything we would have to abandon in order to become the kind of people we have been fighting against.

First off, we would have to give up the goal of Israel living side-by-side with another people, or any other configuration that would end up in an equitable peace.  In its place, we would need a new goal: to see our enemies destroyed.

Now when talking to the public, we would of course couch this bloody-minded end game in flowery language of human rights and justice.  But in our own minds, we would know full well what was meant by whatever counterpart we created to “Palestine from the River to the Sea.”

Next, we would need to find a way to make this potentially genocidal desire seem virtuous and just, ideally by characterizing our enemies as representing a supreme evil whose destruction would be considered a blessing.

Theoretically, we could try to turn the “Apartheid” slur against foes of the Jewish state, taking advantage of how much the term accurately describes the societies most committed to Israel’s destruction. But this kind of jiu-jitsu is not always effective, especially when an opponent is quicker on the draw than you are in seizing a term and using it to their advantage.

With “Apartheid” taken, “Fascism” might do the job as a despised word we could affix to our foes.  After all, one does not negotiate with Fascists or try to understand them.  One eradicates them from the face of the earth and then celebrates their elimination.

But in order to make this labeling work, we cannot simply use the Fascist label once or twice, or throw it out as a rejoinder whenever someone brings up an “Israel=Apartheid” slur.  Rather, we would have to work it into every discussion or debate on the Middle East, regardless of the topic.  Palestine would become “Fascist Palestine,” just as Israel’s security barrier would become the “Anti-Fascism Barrier.”  And if anyone questioned our use of the term, our only reply would be to demand they explain the origins of their apparent support for Fascism.

This gets to another thing we’d have to abandon in order to play at this game: a commitment to honest debate in pursuit of progress and/or truth.  Instead, language would become a weapon designed to hammer home a message again and again, regardless of its truth value.  What this would mean is that any accusation (or even reasonable criticism) hurled at the Jewish state must be ignored or met with a counter-accusation of Fascism (possibly with questions of why our opponent is trying to distract everyone from the real topic – Palestinian Fascism – used as a faux rejoinder).

Finally, given that accusations coming from  the mouth of Israel and its known supporters would have limited impact, we would have to do everything in our power to drag other people and organizations into our web so that we can try to get our words to come out of their mouths.

Now Israel is not without friends, even if we haven’t recruited them to hurl bigoted calumnies at the nation’s sworn enemies.  But that would change if we made the choice to become the counterpart of the BDSholes. People Jews have fought alongside for causes such as Civil Rights and Gay Rights would be shamed into embracing our obsession – or else.   And academic organizations, food coops, community radio stations and any other civic organization we can think of (up to and including our kids’ elementary schools) would become battlegrounds where our side did everything in its power to get our “Palestine=Fascism” claim to become their official policy.

And if that didn’t work, we could just make shit up!  For example, rather than thanking political leaders for their fair-mindedness and support when they pass anti-BDS legislation, we could simply declare those votes as representing the stupendous success of our own “DSB Movement” in getting sanctions passed against “Fascist Palestine.”

No doubt such efforts would tear apart the fabric of civil society just where it is most vulnerable, causing long term damage to every organization our campaign touched.  But with the BDShole mindset, such consequences are immaterial since for us, “intersectionality” means everyone else bowing down before our agenda, regardless of the cost.

So there you have it!  All we need to do to become our enemies is to abandon desires for peace, fairness, intellectual integrity, and concern for others.  And even if we lack other assets our opponents have (like support from dozens of wealthy and powerful states able to corrupt global organizations like the UN), as we have learned ruthless fanaticism can often make up for such material shortcomings.

Perhaps some people reading this still think that this is a price worth paying in order to stop having to take endless punches from our opponents, an opinion with which I can empathize. But before making that choice, keep in mind the ruthless tactics I just described are national policy of those countries ringing the Jewish state who are now experiencing the consequences of a mindset Israel and its friends fortunately refuse to embrace.

3 Responses to Let’s All Become BDSHoles!

  1. ZG January 31, 2016 at 10:11 pm #

    It looks like even many Liberal Democracies adopted the BDS language or at least it’s anti Israel spirit.
    Isn’t it’s time to fight fire with fire?

  2. Plotinus February 1, 2016 at 5:17 pm #

    Is it my imagination or are there less college divestment resolutions on the table this year? I know BDS had one “victory” recently vetoed at FSU and there was another fail at Univ. of Waterloo (not making the university name up LOL). Maybe it’s still early days but I would think students are maybe getting I/P fatigue. My own sense is what will kill these resolutions off is what happened at Stanford. If you want to put Israel on a list to divest from, then you have to put on the same list the PA, Russia, Turkey, Egypt, etc. and of course the US, which they did. And if you put down everyone, you really are putting down no one and the resolution becomes meaningless.

  3. Brian Goldfarb February 1, 2016 at 6:36 pm #

    In other words, we are the sane, rational ones, and the price to be paid for stooping to their level is way too high.

    But isn’t that exactly what we’ve been trying to do all these years? Demand that they ascend to our level of rational debate, with evidence and factual representation?

    Why should we abandon the moral high ground?

    Recently, a friend (more-or-less pro-Israel) said words to the effect that Israel was an apartheid society. At the risk of our friendship, I insisted on the spot that it wasn’t – although my wife wished I hadn’t, because of that risk.

    But the moral high ground is always worth defending.

Leave a Reply

Powered by WordPress. Designed by WooThemes