Recent searches
Search options
Robin Givhan hits an important nail on the head regarding the ICC’s decision:
“The horror [in the minds of Hamas and Israel] is that they have been compared to each other.”
Gift link: https://wapo.st/3QVOFBc
1/
Not that they’ve murdered innocent people. Not that they’ve committed crimes against humanity. Not that they are unanimously viewed by a panel of human rights experts now — and will likely be viewed by future historians for generations to come — as having done something utterly monstrous.
Oh no. “The true indignity is the mere implication that WE are anything like THEM!” cry Likud and Hamas, practically in unison. “How dare the ICC!”
2/
Givhan sees a sharp lesson in this:
“The comparison is stunning: a democracy compared to a terrorist group. [ICC actions] have made it plain that the ways in which countries define themselves are not immutable. The tenets that democracies hold dear are only as sturdy and moral as their leaders and its people.”
3/
“Democracies can lose their way in the pursuit of vengeance. They can become what they have long despised. Without careful consideration, each of us can suddenly find that we are no longer who we’ve always been.”
“The notion of a humane war is a lie combatants tell themselves.”
/end
@inthehands I feel like the main flaw with the argument is that it underestimates that committing atrocities is normal for democracies, the antebellum US or the US in Vietnam or Iraq, the UK in Kenya or Ulster, France in Algeria, Belgium in Congo - democracy is obviously preferable to dictatorship but doesn't necessarily provide any guarantees against atrocity, especially for those considered to be outside the democratic community
@inthehands one of the repeated things I saw from certain Israelis reacting to the news was "I protested against Netanyahu last year but this is outrageous" - because you protested against his crimes against the democratic community, but not against those outside the democratic community
@julieofthespirits I mean…yes, and I think all of that is the central point of the article? She’s approaching that gently from the side, for an audience living inside the bubble of “democracy is inherently good, obviously, so how can it do wrong?!,” as I’m sure a Black woman is used to doing. But what you said is very much where I see her going.
@inthehands oh I didn't see the byline, yeah, could just be softening the argument for liberals so they'll get on board, sometimes you have to hide your power level