My second column on Homer this one focusing on the character of Thersites is up at Libertarianism.org.
Tag Archives | Terror
Call for Abstracts
for the Molinari Societys next Eastern Symposium, to be held in conjunction with the American Philosophical Association Eastern Division meeting, January 6-9, 2016, in Washington DC. (Note that this meeting is the week after New Years, rather than, as in past years, just before New Years. This later time is expected to be the new normal for the Eastern APA henceforth.)
Police Abuse: Solutions Beyond the State
18 May 2015
Abuses of power by police officers, especially abuses motivated by racial bias, are at last beginning to receive increased public scrutiny. Anarchists have long regarded police misconduct as a deep-rooted and systemic problem, one requiring radical rather than reformist solutions, but have not always agreed about what a radical solution should look like. Some anarchists have advocated a system of private security firms held in check by market competition; others have looked to volunteer and mutual-aid watch groups responsible to the communities they patrol; still others have rejected both models as insufficiently different from the government police system theyre supposed to replace.
Would/should there be police, or something like police, in an anarchist society? If so, how might they be restrained from abuses? If not, what institutions or practices might secure protection from invasive behaviour instead?
Abstracts should be submitted for the 2016 Eastern Symposium by 18 May, 2015. Submissions from any point of view (anarchist or otherwise) are welcome. Please submit an abstract only if you expect to be able to present the paper in person at the Symposium. (Final papers should be of appropriate scope and length to be presented within 15-30 minutes.) Submitting authors will be notified of the acceptance or rejection of their papers by 31 May, 2015.
Submit abstracts as e-mail attachments, in Word .doc or .docx format, PDF, or ODT, to email@example.com.
For any questions or information, contact Roderick T. Long at the above email address.
(In other news, the Molinari Symposium originally scheduled for this years Pacific APA in Vancouver has been postponed to next year in San Francisco; details to follow in due course.)
Despite some wise words on markets and on war, Voltaire was not a libertarian. Neither, however, was he the apostle of unlimited government demonised by Hayek. Rather, Voltaire was a brilliant but unsystematic thinker whose thought contains both libertarian and unlibertarian strands.
One of my favourite of his libertarian passages is the following bit from Candide:
“Bravo!” cry the blues; “you are now the support, the defender, the hero of the Bulgarians; your fortune is made; you are in the high road to glory.” So saying, they handcuffed him, and carried him away to the regiment. There he was made to wheel about to the right, to the left, to draw his rammer, to return his rammer, to present, to fire, to march, and they gave him thirty blows with a cane; the next day he performed his exercise a little better, and they gave him but twenty; the day following he came off with ten, and was looked upon as a young fellow of surprising genius by all his comrades.
Candide was struck with amazement, and could not for the soul of him conceive how he came to be a hero. One fine spring morning, he took it into his head to take a walk, and he marched straight forward, conceiving it to be a privilege of the human species, as well as of the brute creation, to make use of their legs how and when they pleased. He had not gone above two leagues when he was overtaken by four other heroes, six feet high, who bound him neck and heels, and carried him to a dungeon.
What I like about this passage is the way it demystifies statist categories. Candide is not described as being “conscripted” into the Bulgarian army, or as subsequently “deserting.” The innocent protagonist lacks these concepts, and the narrative dispenses with them also. Instead we are simply told that a bunch of armed strangers abduct him and force him to spend time marching around and practicing firing guns, and that when he tries to exercise the “privilege of the human species … to make use of their legs” by walking away, he is abducted again. The high acts of state are decomposed into their material basis, the use of force by some people against other people.
This pic is from the ad for next years FreedomFest:
So the dream debate of the century is between a Keynesian who thinks the 9/11 attacks were good for the economy and a George Bush hagiographer who supports economic boycotts as a tool of American imperialism.
Guest Blog by Irfan Khawaja
In a recent post at Bleeding Heart Libertarians, Hang Tough, Israel, Fernando Tesón takes issue with those of his libertarian friends who are relentless in their criticisms of Israel, and responds to them by translating a longish passage from Spanish by the Argentinian writer Marcos Aguinis. What follows are four remarkably ignorant and offensive paragraphs on the Israel/Palestine dispute which Im assuming that Tesón endorses. The post is too short to deserve a very long response, but I think it deserves more criticism than (with some notable exceptions) its so far gotten. Since I assume that Tesón endorses Aguiniss claims, Ill refer mostly to Tesón rather than Aguinis; if Tesón doesnt endorse Aguiniss claims, I have no objection to his publicly disowning as many of them as he now decides to reject.
Much of Tesóns post involves generalizations about the moral character of Palestinians, and Palestinian youth in particular. Heres a particularly offensive one:
In our postmodern times it is increasingly irrelevant where the good and the bad reside. Does it matter that the Israeli youth dream with being inventors and scientists, while the youth of Hezbollah and Hamas dream with being martytrs? Apparently not. Does it matter that in Israel children are not taught to hate the Arabs, while among the Arabs, the Protocols of Zion and Mein Kampf are best sellers, and that the Egyptian TV broadcast a repulsive series where the Jews would extract childrens blood for their rituals? Apparently this doesn’t matter either.
It doesnt seem to have occurred to Tesón that if youre going to describe Israeli youth in one clause of a sentence, the contrasting clause should make reference to Palestinian youth, not the youth of Hamas or Hezbollah, as though Palestinian youth were, as a whole, reducible to a faceless mass of terrorist fanatics, among whom the very essence of badness resides.
More fundamentally, Id ask Tesón pointblank how much face time hes ever had with Palestinian youth (or Palestinians generally), and if he hasnt had very much (as Id surmise), what conceivable basis he could have for a generalization of the sort he endorses in that post. How fluent, for example, is his Arabic? Evidently not fluent enough to list on his CV. But then, how can a person who speaks no Arabic know what Palestinian youth are like? Imagine generalizing about American youth but being unable to string together a sentence in English. Thats the caliber of the discussion hes initiated, and which he regards as a serious contribution to the debate. (For the record: my Arabic is very rudimentary, and I have no facility at all with Hebrew, but then, Im not inclined to make wild generalizations about either Palestinians or Israelis, as Tesón is.)
Last summer, I spent some time in the West Bank, and in particular in the city of Hebron and the village of Beit Umar. One contrast that I observed between Israeli and Palestinian youth was instructive: In Beit Umar, I watched youthful Israeli soldiers (in their 20s) taking physical control of the village by force of arms machine guns, tear gas, armed vehicles blocking its roads so that settlers could help themselves to its resources. Meanwhile, unarmed Palestinian youth confronted them and remonstrated with them by discourse.1 This is an everyday occurrence in Beit Umar and the West Bank generally, though not one typically reported in our media or current in our discourse. It doesnt exactly square with Tesón’s picture of terroristic Palestinian youth.
Meanwhile, just a few miles away, in the town of Abu Dis, my friend Munir Nusseibeh runs the Human Rights Clinic at Al Quds University, specializing in property rights claims a kind of Palestinian version of the Institute for Justice. Munir leads a group of non-violent activists in property rights litigation against a military occupation whose bureaucrats literally enforce their whims and those of the settlers they protect, at gunpoint. After a few intense hours of conversations with him, it occurred to me that he had a better grasp of the nature and value of property rights than most political philosophers I know and certainly better than Tesón himself who, despite his official rejection of collectivist conceptions of property ownership has nothing to say about the explicitly collectivist and expropriative character of Israeli land use policy. (For more details on Israeli land use policy, see Oren Yiftachel’s excellent book, Ethnocracy.) None of this squares with Tesón’s picture, either.
And then there is Lucy Nusseibeh, a one-woman powerhouse who runs MEND, an institute for non-violent protest and democracy.2 Her message? She wants to demilitarize our minds not exactly the stuff of Hamas or Hezbullah. The non-violent nature of her activities has not, of course, prevented her from being raided and shut down by the Israeli authorities the same authorities whom Tesón advises to hang tough as they hunt down such threatening Islamist figures as Big Bird, Cookie Monster, Ernie, and Bert.
Excuse me, but who is operating by the pen here and who is operating by the sword? And my anecdotes merely scratch the surface of the work that Palestinians are doing to create the basis of a non-violent civil society in the West Bank. In mentioning these anecdotes, I don’t intend them as data for generalizations about the depravity of Israeli youth or the heroism of Palestinian youth, but as data against facile generalizations of the kind Tesón takes for granted.
Theres no doubt that Palestinian political culture has its deformities, some of them deeply grotesque, unjust, and irrational. I have no qualms about saying that to anyone anywhere, as I have for decades whether in The New York Times in 1987, or in front of an irritable West Bank audience in 2013.3 (Feel free to do a search on Irfan Khawaja in this book for some more documentation.) But Tesón writes as though the cultural deformities were all or uniquely Palestinian. As it happens, the falsity of this claim is becoming increasingly obvious, and has been obvious for decades. This past Fridays New York Times has a story that makes explicit what most informed Israelis probably take for granted:
Tamir Lion, an anthropologist who studies youth, said he was troubled by the changing attitudes among Israels young people. For many years, Mr. Lion interviewed soldiers about why they chose to enter combat units. The answers, he said on Israel Radio, were always about the challenge, to show I could make it, the prestige involved.
That began to change in 2000, he said. I started to get answers not a lot, but some like: To kill Arabs. The first time I heard it, it was at the time of the large terror attacks, and since then it has not stopped.
A generation has grown up in a period of Israeli-Palestinian conflict, with suicide bombs and military incursions, rocket fire and airstrikes. Young people on both sides may think about the other more as an enemy than as a neighbor.
Mr. Lion, head of research at the Ethos Institute, said he was troubled. Today I can say, and everyone who works with youth will say it, Jewish youth in Israel hate Arabs without connection to their parents or their own party affiliation and their own political opinions. (Killing of Palestinian Youth Puts an Israeli Focus on Extremism).
Those tempted to excuse these attitudes as a justified or understandable response to Palestinian suicide bombings may want to remember that such inferences run both ways: if its understandable that terrorism-traumatized Israelis should want to kill Arabs, it ought to be equally understandable that occupation-traumatized Palestinians should want to kill Israelis. It also ought to be rather obvious that a forty-seven-year long military occupation offers more than its share of opportunities for Israeli depredations. The inferences can only run asymmetrically if we assume either that Israelis have intrinsically greater moral weight than Palestinians, or that Palestinians are always the aggressors and Israelis always the defenders against their aggression. Neither assumption is true, and neither issue is adequately addressed by Tesóns post. (Israeli rights violations are systematically documented by such organizations as BTselem, Al Haq, and the Human Rights Clinic at Al Quds University. I dont necessarily agree with everything that they say or do, but their work is generally admirable and indispensable for understanding the realities of life under Israeli rule.)
I cant literally replicate the reality of Palestinian life under military occupation in a short essay like this one, but You Tube offers a useful supplement to the written word. In offering the videos in this essay as evidence for my claims, let me stress that I am not making global generalizations about Israelis or Jews as such, much less making claims about their heritable traits. Im pointing to well-established socio-political trends within Israel, trends that are the predictable result of its occupation and settlement of the West Bank, and of Zionist ideological assumptions generally.
This seven minute video provides a disheartening account of Anti-Arab sentiment in Israel (though I think Uri Davis understates the degree of anti-Semitism on the Arab side). This ten minute video candidly discusses Israels New Generation of Racists. This eight minute video offers a rather unflattering picture of attitudes among Israeli youth and of specifically American complicity in those attitudes. While you watch it, imagine a comparable scene involving thousands of white American youth with anti-black attitudes marching triumphantly and gleefully through a historically black neighborhood (in drunken throngs, at 3 am) be it Harlem, Watts, Newark, or Detroit while expressing themselves as these Israelis do. For a glimpse at life in Beit Umar, watch this video. For an ordinary day in Hebron, try this one. While watching these videos and you can find hundreds more like them online you might ask yourself how long Palestinians are supposed to endure behavior of the kind depicted in them without taking it upon themselves to engage in retaliatory self-help. You might try to put yourself in the place of the Palestinian victims in these video, a heuristic familiar to most grade school children but notably absent from Tesón’s post.
I’ve saved the best and most topical video for last. It doesnt need much in the way of comment, at least if youve been following recent events in Israel. As you watch the video, try repeating the following Tesónite mantras to yourself and observing how they affect your ability to process what you’re watching:
Does it matter that the Israeli youth dream with being inventors and scientists, while the youth of Hezbollah and Hamas dream with being martytrs?
Already several generations of stoic Israeli citizens have defended the country with one hand while working with the other.
Does it matter to Tesón that the Israeli youth depicted in this video are not dreaming of being inventors or scientists, but of revenge fantasies which theyre enacting in real life? Does it matter to him that what we see here are not Stoic Israeli citizens defending the country with one hand while working with the other, but overwrought Israeli soldiers beating a child with their hands and feet in broad daylight?
I said I would focus here on Tesón, but I should perhaps say a word about Marcos Aguinis. I dont know a great deal about his work, but if what Ive read is any indication of his knowledge of the region and its issues, hes little more than a crude propagandist at the level of Joan Peters, from whom he seems to have gotten a good part of his rhetorical playbook. To quote from an article of Aguinis’s:
No me gusta ser apologista, pero hay hechos demasiado evidentes que se tratan de negar falazmente.
[Rough translation: I dont like having to function as an apologist, but there are facts that are sufficiently evident yet are gratuitously denied [and require a response].]
Delete the No and the whole second clause of this sentence, and you have a good summary of the agenda involved here. Twenty-two years after Rodney King and the LA riots, American readers ought to know better than to accept rhetoric of this nature about a whole ethnicity and frankly, deserve better in the way of reading material on Israel/Palestine from supposedly eminent experts on the ethics of international relations. That Tesón should offer this post in all seriousness to a supposedly serious audience suggests that as far as attitudes about Palestinians and Arabs are concerned, we have a long way to go before we achieve even minimal decency in discussing the subject.
The bottom line is that Israel is a country that has operated a nearly fifty-year long military occupation and militarized settlement campaign at the expense of the millions of Palestinians who live under its rule. It claims to fear Palestinian terrorists, and has built a security wall to keep them out, but then insists on placing its own population on both sides of the wall, nullifying the point of having a wall, and erasing the inside/outside distinction which gives the wall whatever point it was supposed to have. Unfortunately, this desire to have things all ways at once is the classic hallmark of pro-Israeli discourse today, especially in its militant right-wing variety, which, regardless of his intentions, is the variety that Tesóns post exemplifies. Israel may in many respects be a liberal democracy as Tesón and Co. claim, but unfortunately, the occupation proves that you cant have your liberalism and eat it, too. That, Im afraid, is the unintended but actual message of Fernando Tesóns post.
Dept. of Philosophy
 This is what force looks like when it confronts discourse, by the way. So where is the closed area, exactly? Is it just wherever the soldiers tear gas happens to float? It turns out that one cant ask IDF soldiers simple questions like this when theyre mad and on patrol qualities that seem to go together a lot. Their rather non-responsive answers to simple questions often seem to take the form of dirty looks, lots of yelling in Hebrew, angry spitting on the ground, and the gratuitous firing of tear gas rounds. But I dont regard any of that as an answer. Actually, I have a feeling they dont, either.
 Lucy Nusseibeh and Munir Nusseibeh are not related, but Lucy Nusseibeh is married to Sari Nusseibeh, the well-known Palestinian intellectual. Coincidentally, shes also the daughter of the philosopher J.L. Austin.
 I signed the 1987 letter with my middle name rather than my last name after my father took exception to it. I was a minor at the time, and living under his roof.
Three recent items of mine at BHL, quoting and/or linking to items at C4SS: