« Huh? | Main | Just no words »
Sunday, September 21, 2008
Ancient wisdom on a modern topic
It has been a long time since Judea was a backwater province under the rule of Rome. But we would be guilty of the gravest error if we thought for a moment that all that remains to be remembered and studied from the Romans are the physical artifacts under our feet.
Take for example the following wisdom of Marcus Tullius Cicero (excerpted from an address he gave before the Roman Senate in 42 B.C.E.) on an issue that is, sadly, all too familiar to us today:
"A nation can survive its fools, and even the ambitious. But it cannot survive treason from within. An enemy at the gates is less formidable, for he is known and carries his banner openly. But the traitor moves amongst those within the gate freely, his sly whispers rustling through all the alleys, heard in the very halls of government itself. For the traitor appears not a traitor; he speaks in accents familiar to his victims, and he wears their face and their arguments, he appeals to the baseness that lies deep in the hearts of all men. He rots the soul of a nation, he works secretly and unknown in the night to undermine the pillars of the city, he infects the body politic so that it can no longer resist. A murder[er] is less to fear."
These are the words of a man who was, and still is, considered first and foremost a humanist. So it comes as a surprise that so many individuals (i.e. 'academics') and organizations who claim to carry the 'humanist' mantle in Israeli society speak out only in defense of those who openly call for our destruction. Of course there is no lack of 'ambitious fools' here in Israel... but don't they see how this quiet treason undercuts the narrow ledge on which we all stand?
I don't pretend for a moment that our government nor our military are free of abuse and corruption. In fact anyone who has read even a tiny fraction of my writing here knows how freely I criticize the state, it's functionaries and its various organs. But there is a yawning chasm that lies between being critical of our country's policies, and being a vocal advocate for those who would rejoice at the destruction of all we have created here.
If one is unsure or unaware of our (ancient and modern) legal / moral rights to Hevron and Jerusalem... it is a simple thing for 'sly whisperers rustling through alleys' to discredit our legal and moral claims to Tel Aviv and Haifa.
If we have learned nothing from our own history in Israel/Judea... and if we value nothing of our modern and ancient connections/claims to this place... perhaps the (religious and secular) humanists among us can at least accept something of worth from our former masters in Rome. Surely their wisdom can't also be suspect.
Hat tip to long-time reader, Howard L., who forwarded me an article that contained the Cicero quote.
Posted by David Bogner on September 21, 2008 | Permalink
TrackBack
TrackBack URL for this entry:
https://www.typepad.com/services/trackback/6a00d8341c581e53ef010534c05421970c
Listed below are links to weblogs that reference Ancient wisdom on a modern topic:
Comments
You can follow this conversation by subscribing to the comment feed for this post.
Well said!
Posted by: Rickismom | Sep 21, 2008 4:44:55 PM
Indeed, Trep; as a dual citizen (first the US, then Israel) you might feel it more than I as a mere uni-citizen. I see it here more than elsewhere, because it is closest, I figure.
Any revival of Latin wisdom, or Greek, or Hebrew, or Chinese -- the Old Cultures -- is welcome to me. Too many have so forgotten them that they *don't even think of missing them anymore.*
How tragic is that?
Meanwhile -- you struggle against your whisperers; I will strive against ours...
And may you find joy all around you aside from the struggles.
Posted by: Wry Mouth | Sep 21, 2008 11:32:13 PM
please be extra careful before injudicious use of the word "traitor" as we still remember 1995, and will never let it be forgotten.
Posted by: asher | Sep 22, 2008 1:01:23 PM
Rickismom... Why thank you.
Wrymouth... Agreed.
asher... It seems some definitions are required to make sure we are all on the same page:
"treason n. Violation of allegiance toward one's country or sovereign, especially the betrayal of one's country by waging war against it or by consciously and purposely acting to aid its enemies."
That definition could easily apply to MKs Beilin and Peres who knowingly violated several Israeli laws to illegally meet with our enemies... entered into private negotiations with them (without the consent or involvement of the sovereign government) and then presented an agreement (Oslo) to a weak PM as a fait accompli.
If proof is needed to show that these actors aided Israel's enemies, kindly google 'Oslo War' and ponder the cause and effect described there. If you don't agree with the fact that they acted consciously, kindly note that they continue to aid Israel's enemies by sanctioning unilateral 'gestures' that only benefit the enemy, and weaken our own security position.
"Assassination n. The targeted killing of a high-profile person.[singular] An added distinction between assassination and other forms of killing is that the assassin (one who performs an assassination) usually has an ideological or political motivation"
Kindly note that this definition describes an attack on an individual, while treason is an attack on an entire country. In a democracy no elected or appointed individual is irreplaceable. The assassination of Yitzhak Rabin was a terrible, inexcusable thing. But it did not aid Israel's enemies (nor was it demonstratively intended to). In fact, you can say what you want about Yigal Amir... but to my knowledge, nobody has offered a theory that he intended to aid the Arabs when he killed Rabin.
That, my friend, is the important distinction between treason and assassination. Feel free to print it out so you won't make that mistake again.
This is perhaps the seventh or eighth time you have brought up the killing of Yitzhak Rabin in such a way as to insinuate that it was an event sanctioned/perpetrated by the entire religious right against the entire secular left. There are some loonies out there who subscribe to conspiracy theories to the contrary, but to date there is no proof that Yigal Amir was anything but a lone assassin who acted with the help and foreknowledge of, at most, a tiny handful of equally misguided people.
Your continued libelous accusations of treason against the entire right wing of Israel's political spectrum is more than distasteful. It is dangerous. And it is wrong. I don't care what kind of rhetoric was flying around back then. It was flying around on both sides of the political aisle (and continues to fly, as evidenced by your disgusting smears).
A demonstratively large swath of Israel's left-leaning population supported the illegal and treasonous actions that led to the signing and implementation of the Oslo accords. You may support this on Machiavellian grounds (i.e. the end justifies the means), but remains a provable fact that laws were broken... and that amounts to treason.
I think you would be hard pressed to demonstrate that those who approved of the killing of Yitzhak Rabin are more than a lunatic fringe that amount to a statistical rounding error. I'm talking about proof here... not your feelings.
This is your last chance asher. I appreciate you for the fact that you hold different political and religious ideas than I do. I have much to learn from you, and hope you will be able to present your ideas in a way that is constructive. But if you insist on slandering nearly half of Israel's population (myself included) and arrogantly using the term 'we' to refer to the other half that reserve the exclusive right to be outraged by the killing of a sitting PM... well you will find that your welcome here will be quickly worn out. Your call.
Posted by: treppenwitz | Sep 22, 2008 2:24:08 PM
All I asked was to be careful before using the word traitor, nothing more.
So, admittedly you were not actually here in 1995 and its Summer-of-Hate, but even so. Strange, but I saw the posters of Rabin-in-a-keffiya, Rabin-in-SS-uniform. Strange that when Bibi and David Levi stood on the balcony in Jerusalem, that Bibi did not hear the cries of Rabin-the-Traitor and Rabin-the -Murderer. Stranger still is that Levy, ex-construction worker, and 12 years senior to Bibi did hear them (his ears seem to be in better shape despite all) and tried to remonstrate with the crowd, but to no avail.
Remember, that for us (secular lefties if you must), phrases like din rodef and pulsa de nura seem to belong to the time of the Golem of Prague, but there are people who live by that. The Rabbis who knew and kept quiet are guilty. I used to think that Avigdor Eskin was a clown with bad taste in clothes but I was wrong, very wrong.
I did as you said, and googled for the phrase Oslo War and got just short of 19,000 pages. Surprise, they are on a small selection of sites, all pushing a particular view. On the other hand I googled for moon landing fake OR hoax and got 365,000 (x20) and flat earth got me 3,710,000 (x200). Dosn't prove anything.
Call it Oslo War, just like 1941-1945 is the Great-Patriotic-War, after all 60 years ago Orwell showed what you can do with newspeak.
All I asked was to be careful before using the word traitor, nothing more.
Posted by: asher | Sep 23, 2008 11:38:43 AM
asher... No, you said a good deal more than that. Here, let me refresh your memory:
"please be extra careful before injudicious use of the word "traitor" as we still remember 1995, and will never let it be forgotten."
Who exactly is this 'we' of which you arrogantly speak? How dare you speak for anyone and how dare you sit in judgement. What it sounds like is that 'we' is the secular left (of which you count yourself a member) and the crime committed in 1995 (Rabin's assassination) seems, in your mind, to be an act for which you can be judge and jury to pronounce all religious right guilty. This is why you are on the precipice of being banned here. I have personally heard many leftist rallies where chants of 'fascistim' and 'nazim' and 'death to the Likud' are tossed about as casually as you please. To the end of his life, Rabin was on record as saying that his role in the Altalena affair (which included the shooting of unarmed Jews in the waters off Tel Aviv beach) remained one of his proudest moments! How is that different/better than tossing around the word 'traitor'?
Israel is a place where political discourse is not what anyone would call nuanced. Both sides of the political spectrum are guilty of disgusting behavior and a complete lack of restraint in the way they express themselves. But if you want to talk about the killing of Rabin, that was the act of a lone lunatic despite the fact that many of the political right considered Rabin (correctly, in my opinion) a traitor to his country for being too weak to stand up to Peres and Beilin who had broken several laws to perpetrate Oslo. If you can honestly say that the second intifada had no connection to the Oslo accords, then you and I have no common ground on which to meet. If you still feel that Oslo is a reasonable framework that was arrived at in a legal, democratic manner, then I fear for any political system in which you participate. You seem to be a proponent of anarchy, and lawlessness when the ends suit your agenda (the anti-democratic way the disengagement was rammed down the country's throat comes to mind), but throw out curses upon equally distasteful anarchy and lawlessness when carried out by those you disagree with. That makes you a hypocrite of the first order. I, on the other hand have always been quick to condemn the very tiny lunatic fringe on the political right, because I believe in the rule of law. you, on the other hand, seem to believe only in laws when they suit your world view.
Lastly, if you can honestly sit there and say you would rather cling to your hatred for the eternal right to blame the right for Rabin's death rather than search for common ground... if the killing of your sainted Rabin by a lone actor has made it impossible for you to see anything redeeming or worthwhile about the ideas expressed by the political right... then I will not waste my time trying to talk with you. You are lost.
Posted by: treppenwitz | Sep 23, 2008 12:07:19 PM
I came as a student in 95 (August, to be exact) but was sufficiently remote (Beersheva) and clueless and Hebrew-less to be relatively ignorant of what was going on.
However I was here during the Disengagement. I saw the posters comparing Israeli soldiers to Nazis and the like. I heard the rhetoric. Years later, these posters and the violent rhetoric still have an impact on how I perceive settlers/ Yesha and the Disengagement. Suffice it to say that I will not be voting Moshe Feiglin any time soon.
Language is a powerful weapon, and we should be judicious in its use and slow to start tossing about the words "traitor", "Nazi" or anything similar.
In respect to the word "Nazi"--whenever I see it used by the Palestinians, my immediate response is that, if we were Nazis, there would be no Palestinians. We would have slaughtered them outright years ago. Ditto for the settlements. We would not have moved people--we would have lined them up and shot them.
I mean--for JEWS to not understand the meaning of the word Nazi is just assinine.
Posted by: Gila | Sep 24, 2008 6:28:55 AM
Regarding our legal and moral rights to Jerusalem and Hevron...with rights come responsibilities. If we are neither willing nor able to take on the responsibilities (aka--giving full citizenship and equal rights to the folks living there--I for one am not particularly ready for that) then the most reasonable alternative is giving up some of the rights. But to expect that millions of people will just accept a situation in which they really have no rights and no control over their destiny and in which they are perpetual second-class citizens at the mercy of a ruling class that does not particularly like them is more than a little ridiculous. Would you accept it? If I were Palestinian, I certainly would not. Would I be throwing rocks and blowing stuff up? I would like to think not. But I would also like to think that I would not be sitting quietly. (Does "no taxation without representation" ring any bells?)
Another point on the importance of watching one's use of words--a powerful word loses it's meaning and becomes weak and laughable with overuse. Such, for example, is the designation of "traitor" to anyone who does not agree with one's political views, and in particular when said opposing views are held by a good chunk of the country. Sure, the choir members in your audience will always lap it up. But others who may not be convinced BUT who are sincerely interested in hearing the your point of view will find it that much easier to dismiss you as a raving fanatic.
In short, less time name-calling...more time expressing what your beliefs are, and why you have them.
Posted by: Gila | Sep 24, 2008 2:43:46 PM
Gila... OK, I was gonna let your first comment pass with the assumption that you either didn't read the entire post or that you didn't read all the comments. But the second comment can't go without a response:
First, as I've said previously (in this thread and on many other posts) the Israeli left gets very upset when those on the right toss around words like 'Nazi' 'fascist', etc. But I have never... not once!... seen a rally organized/attended by the Israeli left (and I've been to plenty) where those words (and worse) weren't tossed around freely against whoever had earned the ire of the crowd that day. In short, horribly inappropriate speech is not a partisan issue here. It is a shameful trait by idiots on both sides of the political spectrum.
Next, there is the perception by many on the left that just because something is 'in the consensus', it does not need to pass legal muster. The Oslo accords were arrived at by illegal and undemocratic methods by MKs Beilin and Peres. We're not talking about J-walking here. What they did was treasonous by every legal definition. They met with an enemy behind the back (i.e. without the approval/authority) of the government and negotiated an agreement that did horrible damage to Israel's security. The disengagement was equally undemocratic and those who opposed the disengagement were routinely denied their legal rights of assembly, expression and movement (not to mention due process of law when they were arrested). As to the people who were actually forced out of their homes, I hope you act as well if you are ever forcibly removed from a home that the government encouraged you to build. If you feel the need to express outrage regarding the Gaza evacuees, it would be more appropriate to be outraged by the fact that the government broke pretty much every promise made to them and that they are still in temporary housing and unemployed.
Another point; I don't subscribe to the bogeyman statistics that warn of a demographic time bomb if we were to give citizenship to the west bank Arabs. Those statistics are based on Arab census figures that have never been verified. The available information that can be verified indicates a much lower birth rate among Arabs than previously assumed, and a population significantly smaller as well. But while I agree with the basic premise that nobody should be a 'second class citizen'... I feel strongly that with citizenship comes responsibilities. Even without the west bank, Israel must quickly remedy the fact that less than half of it's citizens are doing any kind of national service (I'm talking about Arabs, haredim and religious women). But if Israel annexes part or all of the west bank it will be absolutely essential to have citizens show allegiance to the country by contributing some sort of compulsory national service. The days of allowing Israel's Arab citizens to benefit from their citizenship while supporting Israel's enemies must end. Perhaps once they are full partners in building and supporting the state they will feel some loyalty to it as well. BTW, if Egypt and Jordan (two countries that certainly had a hand in creating the refugee problem) would ante up with some land or acceptance of Palestinian residents, the 'demographic problem' would be even more of a non-issue. Israel cannot be expected to be the only one responsible for the poor Arabs.
Lastly, your parting shot was unbecoming of you. While I admit to being a bit emotional at times, I always express my beliefs and explain them fully. If anything, I provide too much information about what I'm thinking at any given moment and far too much background information for the typical blog reader. So say what you want about my other points... but to call me an irresponsible name caller is just plain wrong.
Posted by: treppenwitz | Sep 24, 2008 3:23:58 PM
The comments to this entry are closed.
