Maya Tries to Say Something

How israeli Propaganda Works (on israelis)

Being fuled to post on here by frustration only is a bad habit I should try to... kill while it's still young. Maybe to do that I can draw some inspiration from my lovely home country. And there's that bitterness I hate showcasing, but when the thing that actually brings me back here in the middle of exam season is ranting about ills I feel pretty powerless to change1, the attitude comes with.

A news item popped up on my instagram feed (all excerpts translated by me):

hamas declared suspention of release of hostages for alleged ceasefire violations by israel. hamas spokeperson claims israel attacked Gaza multiple times, delayed return of displaced people to the north of the strip, did not allow in humanitarian aid, and more.

well fuck, this is bleak but not at all surprising. Since, y'know, those things did happen (and here is another example). But for the overwhelming majority of israelis, this does come as a surpise. The item doesn't state the fact that these violations are in fact real, nor did Under the Radar who posted it report on them at all. You might wish to discredit social media news outlets, so lets look at some traditional israeli media to see if it's any different: Ma'ariv: the same, Ha'aretz: the same with a side of citing netanyahu's recent behavior as the reason for hamas', and with the addition of this statement made by israel's minister of defense:

MoD israel katz said that hamas' statement is "a total violation of the ceasefire and hostage release deal". He added the he instructed the IDF to "be highly prepared for any situation in Gaza".

Calcalist: the same, including this mind-blowing excerpt:

The talks adressed the Palestinians' claims, according to them israel is allegedly2 not allowing humanitarian aid into Gaza. "The claims were checked, there's nothing to them," say israeli sources. israel made clear that hamas' behavior is irresponsible and jeopardizes the deal. israel reiterated that hamas' militant language and its claims about israeli violations that never were - might harm the deal and were meant to create a "blame game" with nothing to it.

Besides the lie that hamas is the side that broke the deal first, there is a broader narrative being furthered here: that hamas is a monster that acts completely outside of human rationality, whose moves cannot be predicted and so it cannot be a partner for any negotiation, and the only way to deal with it is a limitless armed asssault on Gaza. The "No Partner" narrative is nothing new - it has been used to manufacture consent for the deepening of israel's violent occupation and ethnic cleasning for as long as I can remember. It's a very simple system for a society to work by:

Perpetuate the cycle of violence. Only consider and make seen the violence done to your people, devoid of political and historical context and reason, thus portrayed as animalistic bloodshed for bloodshed's sake. Make sure to conflate context and resaon with justification, and delegitimize people who bring them forth by acccusing them of condoning these acts. Use the pain of your own harmed people to justify hitting harder, taking more land, displacing more people, using more and more extreme methods of attack. Repeat.

And so, this is what I believe will be said ad nauseam (both within israeli discourse and as a pro-israel talking point) if the deal will be officially over: "We peace loving israelis reluctantly, after 15 months of war crimes TRIED a deal never mind the fact that our government is doing its best to sabotage its progression into phase B, or that our army did not actually cease fire in Gaza3 but the other side just wasn't satisfied with it - they never are! There's clearly no partner here, our only other option is war never mind that the military efforts killed more hostages than they rescued."

I know nothing I said here is new, nor is it original. This has all been said and done before. I just wonder how long can this facade keep going, how long can a society blind itself to its own atrocities. And how long before I go crazy from being a part of it.

  1. That's a shame too. I told a friend the next post will be about something nice, and I have a pretty cute half-a-post about the public image of philosophers gathering dust in my drafts.

  2. I need to stress that this is not a mistake on my part, the article uses "claims", "according to" and "allegedly" all in one sentence.

  3. Or in the West Bank, or in Lebanon, and it is still invading Syria, but who cares, right?!