Rachel Goldberg’s son Hersh is a hostage in Gaza. In an N. Y. Times essay I Hope Someone Somewhere Is Being Kind to My Boy she concluded, “And I would say this, then, as mother to other mothers: If you see Hersh, please help him. I think about it a lot. I really think I would help your son, if he was in front of me, injured, near me.”
Would you, like Rachel Goldberg, see the humanity in your “enemy?”
When you consider Israelis and Palestinians, do you want the same for both—the freedom to flourish, fulfill their needs, and thrive? In his essay “Freedom is No Illusion,” sociologist Frank Furedi wrote, “We should be celebrating freedom as the medium through which the human spirit can express itself and develop its capacities.”
I’m not asking you for a policy solution. I’m not asking you to whom to assign blame. I’m asking if you can see Israelis and Palestinians as “Thous” and not “Its.”
In I and Thou, the best-known work of philosopher Martin Buber, the author describes two fundamentally different ways of seeing people: “I-Thou” or “I-It.”
Looking through the “I-Thou” lens, we see our connectedness and common humanity with others. Through the “I-It” lens, others are seen as less than us, either as objects to use or obstacles to get out of our way. Identity politics, with its constant search for victims and victimizers, looks at the world through “I-It” eyes.
Few reading this essay are capable of heinous crimes. Yet, have we been contributing to a world where some are seen as “Its”? Are their people whose humanity doesn’t matter much to us?
Is there a little bit of Hamas in each of us?
On Monday, I quoted Rose Wilder Lane, “Men who behave as if the brotherhood of man were not a fact, are alive to do so only because it is a fact.” Lane’s The Discovery of Freedom is one of the most important and riveting books you can read.
The great Muslim reformer Ayaan Hirsi Ali recently described her experience growing up in Somalia. For Ali, at one time, brotherhood was not a fact:
The worst insult in the Somali community was to be called a 'Jew', not that any of us actually knew one. To be called a 'Jew' was so abhorrent, some felt justified in killing anyone who so dishonoured them with this 'slur'.
As a teenager in Nairobi in the 1980s, I joined the Muslim Brotherhood — the strict Sunni Islamist movement, founded in Egypt in 1928, from which Hamas ultimately descends.
I vividly remember sitting with my female fellows in mosques, cursing Israel and praying to Allah to destroy the Jews. We were certainly not interested in a peaceful 'two-state solution': we were taught to want to see Israel wiped off the map.
And in a 2022 Wall Street Journal podcast, Ali gave this powerful warning:
I'm just stunned to watch what I thought was the greatest nation in the world abandon its institutions, abandon its history and adopt these farcical theories that are now summed up in wokeism… if these ideologues get what they want, they're going to transform the world that we thought was civilized, America and the rest of the West, to look like the world that I fled.
All suffering begins with forgetting our True Nature and humanity. Hamas is a philosophy at odds with Reality. And philosophies at odds with Reality only die when more people are willing to align themselves with Reality.
Throughout history, there have been tribes and individuals who have loudly and often violently proclaimed their specialness, failing to recognize that everyone else who has ever lived on this planet is made of the same basic stuff.
In his Meditations, Marcus Aurelius observed:
Everything is interwoven, and the web is holy; none of its parts are unconnected. They are composed harmoniously, and together they compose the world. One world, made up of all things. One divinity, present in them all.
Aurelius wrote Meditations to give himself reminders. Like all of us, his thinking would take him in the wrong direction. Aurelius was building mental discipline by setting out his principles so that he could fall back on them when his thinking was off.
Realizing his tendency not to see connectedness, Aurelius admonished himself, “Keep reminding yourself of the way things are connected, of their relatedness. All things are implicated in one another and in sympathy with each other.”
What is a fallen leaf? Yard trash? What is a wave separated from the ocean? A small puddle that evaporates? Can we understand that “everything is interwoven?”
In modern times, quantum physicist David Bohm called this interconnectedness the implicate order, where “everything is enfolded into everything.” We cannot fully comprehend or see the implicate order. However, knowing there is an implicate order is a valuable guide for living.
Like Marcus Aurelius, we can watch our antics. We can notice when we place the “story of me” above everyone and everything. We can feel the pain we cause ourselves and others when we believe we are not connected. We can catch ourselves behaving as if our tribe is superior. With awareness, we can make a different choice.
Mosab Hassan Yousef, son of a Hamas founder, wrote, “As long as we continue to search for enemies anywhere but inside ourselves, there will always be a Middle East problem.”
We are sitting in the comfort of a safe place. What can each of us do to root out our inner terrorist?
Auschwitz survivor and psychologist Dr. Edith Egger, who witnessed her mother being sent to death by Josef Mengele, has written two outstanding books, The Choice and The Gift. In The Gift she describes the time, “a fourteen-year-old boy came to his court-appointed therapy session wearing a brown shirt and brown boots, leaned his elbow on the table, and started ranting about how to make America white again, about how to kill all the Jews, niggers, Mexicans, and chinks.”
Egger continues, “Fury swept through me. I wanted so badly to shake him, to say, ‘How dare you talk like that? Do you know who I am? My mother died in a gas chamber!’”
Egger wrote, “Just when I thought I might reach out my hands and throttle him, I heard a voice within say, ‘Find the bigot in you.’”
Egger’s ego spoke first: “Impossible, I thought. I’m not a bigot. I’m a Holocaust survivor and an immigrant. I lost my parents to hate. I used the ‘colored’ bathroom at the factory in Baltimore in solidarity with my African American coworkers. I marched for civil rights with Dr. Martin Luther King Jr. I’m not a bigot!”
Then Egger saw there was more to learn about letting go of judgment. (Note: To let go of judgment does not mean you don’t discern evil and intervene to do something about it.)
Eger realized, “But to stop bigotry means you start with yourself. You let go of judgment and choose compassion.”
Egger learned, among other things,
Even a Nazi can be a messenger of God. This boy was my teacher, guiding me to the choice I always have to replace judgment with compassion—to recognize our shared humanity and practice love.
It’s tempting to hate the haters. But I feel sorry for people who are taught to hate.
We’re not all descendants of Nazis. But we each have a Nazi within.
Freedom means choosing, every moment, whether we reach for our inner Nazi or our inner Gandhi. For the love we were born with or the hate we learned.
Eger shared another story of learning to let go of her inner Nazi:
I had lunch the other day at a fancy country club with women looking like a million dollars, every one of them. Why am I spending an afternoon with people who look like Barbie dolls? I thought. Then I caught myself in the act of judging others, engaging in the same us-versus-them mentality that killed my parents. When I put my prejudice aside, I discovered that the women were deep thinkers, that they’d experienced difficulty and pain. I’d been ready to write them off out of hand.
Eger’s conclusion: “When we live in the prison of judgment, we don’t just victimize others. We victimize ourselves.”
We can’t solve Middle East problems, but we can be accountable. In our daily encounters, we can see others as Thous and recognize the common humanity we share with them.
The flip side of Alexander Solzhenitsyn’s observation about the line between good and evil running through us, which will be there until the second coming & for which we need to be always on guard as we live.
Dear Barry,
I think this is the important point of your essay and it is of universal application.
"Hamas is a philosophy at odds with Reality. And philosophies at odds with Reality only die when more people are willing to align themselves with Reality.
Throughout history, there have been tribes and individuals who have loudly and often violently proclaimed their specialness, failing to recognize that everyone else who has ever lived on this planet is made of the same basic stuff."
I add a few observations to support it. I was prompted to do so by Mark S Griffith’s commentary which fails to grasp the point you are making when he says:
"It is exactly this sort of liberal thinking and tendency to equivocate everything and everyone that has landed Israel in this situation in the first place. Instead of a clear eyed understanding that if they are to survive, enough Arabs must die to make them stop wanting to eradicate the Jews and Israel."
Constantinos Kollias’ beautiful photograph of the Acropolis of Athens which you used as the epigram for “Why civilization is at Stake,” calls these words to mind:
"For by nature we all equally, both barbarians and Greeks, have an entirely similar origin: for it is fitting to fulfil the natural satisfactions which are necessary to all men: all have the ability to fulfil these in the same way, and in all this none of us is different either as barbarians or as Greek, for we all breathe into the air with mouth and nostrils."
This, from nearly 3000 years ago, is contained in a fifth-century BCE papyrus fragment, On Truth, attributed to Antiphon, an Athenian orator and thinker. It succinctly states why the rational man knows that other men have the same essential ‘humanness’ as he has.
Around 2500 years later, at the beginning of the period now known as the Enlightenment --the great ‘Age of Reason’ -- John Locke (1632-1704) expressed the same truth when he explained that all men are born free, equal "in respect of jurisdiction or dominion one over another", independent and with capacity for rationality. (See Book II of Two Treatises, §§ 4, 54, 61.)
This segues to your commentary on the “I-Thou” lens through which may be seen connectedness and common humanity with others. This lens enables an objective and observable view of the natural humanness of each human being. Whilst each is different, the human essence is the same. In contrast, the “I-It” lens juxtaposes discordant concepts. "
The “It” does not derive from objective observation of humankind’s natural humanness. It uses faith-based ideas to focus on observable differences, justifying assumptions of superiority and inferiority, rightness and wrongness, based on those differences, even though there is no rational basis for doing so.
More importantly in the present context, the differences may be the faith-based ideas themselves. Because they are faith-based, it is extraordinarily difficult to effect reconciliation between them, or toleration one of another.
This does not mean that all humanity-denying conduct is the product of faith-based ideas but, even when the simple desire to exercise power and control is the motivation, an ideology which defies Reality is usually called in aid.
In Locke’s England, the existence of God and the rightness of Christianity was taken for granted. The main divide was between Protestantism and Catholicism and people had been condemned to be burned at the stake for the “heresy” of proclaiming one or the other, depending on the prevailing monarch’s religious allegiance.
Locke’s qualification to his famous declarations of freedom and equality shows how faith-based ideas may provide justification for “Subordination or Subjection.”
"TO understand Political Power right, and derive it from its Original, we must consider what State all Men are naturally in, and that is, a State of perfect Freedom to order their Acions, and dispose of their Possessions, and Persons as they think fit, within the bounds of the Law of Nature, without asking leave, or depending upon the Will of any other Man.
A State also of Equality, wherein all the Power and Jurisdiction is reciprocal, no one having more than another: there being nothing more evident, than that Creatures of the same species and rank promiscuously born to all the same advantages of Nature, and the use of the same faculties, should also be equal one amongst another without Subordination or Subjection, unless the Lord and Master of them all, should by any manifest Declaration of his Will set one above another, and confer on him by an evident and clear appointment an undoubted Right to Dominion and Sovereignty.
That means that the conclusions from observation and reason could be set to one side if something different was decreed by the Lord and Master of them all."
The 1988 Hamas Covenant invokes Allah. For example:
"The Islamic Resistance Movement is a distinguished Palestinian movement, whose allegiance is to Allah, and whose way of life is Islam. It strives to raise the banner of Allah over every inch of Palestine. "(Article 6).
The Charter indicates what raising the banner entails. For example:
"The Day of Judgment will not come about until Moslems fight Jews and kill them. Then, the Jews will hide behind rocks and trees, and the rocks and trees will cry out: 'O Moslem, there is a Jew hiding behind me, come and kill him." (Article 7)
"The day the enemies usurp part of Moslem land, Jihad becomes the individual duty of every Moslem. In the face of the Jews' usurpation, it is compulsory that the banner of Jihad be raised." (Article 15)
According to the Hamas Charter, Allah as Lord and Master has issued those commands.
Reality is that which exists. The Hamas ideology is at odds with reality because it is grounded on the ‘commands’ of a non-existent commander. Its sustenance is faith, ingrained from birth.
In England, as the Age of Reason advanced, laws condemning heresy were discontinued and over time other laws supporting the Christian religion were also repealed. This is an example of the death of a philosophy at odds with reality. Not the general idea of Christianity, which is still there to some extent, but the fundamentalist form which demanded vengeance against those voicing disagreement with the prevailing orthodoxy.
That’s what must happen in the Moslem world. When it happens, the Hamas ideology will lose its sustenance. It may take a long time. Similar ideologies ruled the Western world for centuries.
Killing “Arabs”, as Mr Griffith would have it, won’t get rid of the Hamas faith-based ideology. It’s more likely to reinforce it. What might be more likely to assist is for the Western world to set an example by heeding Ayaan Hirsi Ali’s warning about new ideologies being well on the way to destroying Western civilisation.
Regarding the present conflict, whatever arguments may be raised about the legitimacy of its origins and the conduct of its government, Israel is a sovereign state which is entitled to defend itself against terrorist aggression. It ought not to go beyond self-defense. I cannot, at least presently, form a view of what constitutes self-defense in the context of this conflict.