Historical Sense – by Paulo Rosenbaum

“–What is a Jew?

–Someone with a sense of history”

Isaiah Berlin

_____________

At the height of the Cold War, Herbert Marcuse wrote that maintaining balance between nuclear powers was the mutual and rational understanding of the meaning of the initiative for nuclear action. The word deterrence, more than desirable, contains a lovely concept. Analogically, among the multiple meanings and meanings it also includes disenchantment, discouragement, getting rid of one’s head, and, finally, in common parlance “cold water shower”. I insist on the word, because its meaning seems to be unknown in the vocabulary of fanatics and this is fundamental to analyze the extent of the problem of the war that has started. Theocratically inspired terrorist groups do not understand deterrence because the impulse to terrorism is directly dependent on thanatophilia, a glorification, the worship of death as a sacrifice that is independent of the results: they will be enjoyed after life.

Furthermore, it is speculated that the ignominious attacks that the terrorist organization Hamas carried out against civilian populations on October 7th also had the leitmotif of attracting Israel — which must act with extreme wisdom and prudence — into a second ambush. In other words, with refinements of unprecedented cruelty, install unprecedented terror and maximize fear with unprecedented devastation through massacres, rapes, incineration, decapitation of babies, and kidnappings that are still ongoing. The objectives: destroy the myth of invulnerability, obstruct peace agreements with Saudi Arabia and instigate Israel’s political isolation.

Now, the specialty of Jewish culture itself over the millennia has been iconoclastic, therefore, the first function was already destined to fail. The exercise of self-criticism, humility and above all the constant ability to reevaluate the context, has always been part of the DNA of the Jewish people. The well-known metaphor of a question answered with another question is self-evident proof of this almost innate hermeneutic procedure. Aspects that fanatics of any kind are deprived of. On the contrary, the hatred of fundamentalists focuses precisely on doubt, the imprecise, what cannot be certain. It is understandable that they do not support civilizations that put themselves to the test, democracies, and the permanent challenge to absolute certainties: the relativization of everything.

The terrorists’ second mission is also proving to be deficient, although it is an aspect to be observed and followed with caution: sabotaging agreements and achieving Israel’s political isolation. A large part of the West, especially true democracies – as there are occasional ones – have reacted in a compassionate and favorable way to Israel. It is worth saying, not exactly against the Hebrew State, but taking a stand against barbarism, in this clear attack not only on Jews and people of other religions and ethnicities — from 40 different countries — but in favor of all civilization.

The marks of the Holocaust were still alive, in a long healing process, soothed by the idea that there was now a State, close to infallibility, in terms of security and reception. A government that could defend the Jews in case opportunists see an opening to repeat old mistakes, mistakes that many have attempted throughout history. No state is infallible, and, in fact, Israel made mistakes and wasted many opportunities for peace with the more pragmatic wing of the Palestinian Authority, who were murdered and expelled from Gaza by Hamas.

What do you do when you face an enemy who rejects peace, not because he doesn’t know it or ignores the term, but precisely because he knows exactly what it means?

So how will we understand each other?

Peace is a ruse, an alibi to moderate impulses, a food that no one accepts naturally. The great meaning of peace, still unknown, cannot be shared. It is not silence, concord, tranquility, or “woe to the vanquished”. What peace does not bring, bombs supply. To form a truce it is necessary to coexist, if not in language, in language. Multiculturalism, which should mean relaxation and coexistence, has been transforming into multisectarianism. In a progressive corrosion that reaches culture, electronic networks have multiplied dialects and tribes. After almost eight decades after the end of the Second World War, there is a bolder analysis than the superficiality of Chomsky’s conspiracy theories: terror may be legitimized under the political manipulation of fear. Several experts have asserted that terrorist organizations have taken the place of absent administrations — under a similar operating mode in organized crime and other pockets of violence. And there are those who read in a reductionist way that the presence of the state means left, and its absence could be translated as right. Evidently, neither one nor the other.

Non-radical Islam knows that everything that has been done by Hamas in the name of faith is a perversion of Muslim religious rules. In an apparent contradiction, while jihadists burn “infidels” and massacre civilians, children or adults, they at the same time subsidize sophisticated medical treatments for sick people and operate under the auspices of tribal leaders, who, in return, give them (often having no other option) ) moral support and hiding in their homes and public places in case of military responses from the attacked entities.

Terrorist groups then fill power gaps. Furthermore, similar to electronic sellers of faith, they offer a paid way out of transcendence. The West has preferred not to notice another obvious psychological gap: the crisis of meaning that is plaguing societies. The left, in turn, disregards the “hunger for meaning” to attribute all responsibility to socioeconomic marginalization. Even though dark times are back, it is better to accept and name them than to deny them.

Old enemies need to overcome differences and accept again that, with a common enemy lurking, sooner or later union will be inevitable. But it is urgent to define a typification: assuming that there are incurable public enemies of humanity who must be isolated and brought to justice. For these, impose codes of peace, preferably ones that contain tolerance and freedom. No one will get out of this mess alone and there is not even a guarantee that a provisional consensus will be successful. As long as Israel does not have a media channel to give its version of the facts, I do not see how to reverse the long construction that previously and permanently deprived Israel of the presumption of innocence. It is worth saying, it doesn’t matter much what happens in reality, the image of the Jewish State as a culprit or a debtor in relation to world public opinion persists. It seems that debate, logical argument, and even historical evidence do not dissuade those who have always been convinced. They use debate only and exclusively to narrate their dogmas and issue their peremptory certainties. It is not about open debate, listening, a hermeneutic process of interpretation to reach intellectual consensus, even if precarious. No.

It is always important to remember that the death drive, a favorite food of fanatics, tends to have an erratic course.

And unpredictable.

Tags

Herbert Marcuse

Chomsky

Jihadists

Israel

War in Israel

Death Drive

Thanatophilia

Umberto Eco

Palestinian Authority

Dissuasion

Multiculturalism

Multisectarianism

Blog Paulo Rosenbaum

News Tale

news story blog

Stephan Zweig