by Judith Bergman
As recently as this summer, Palestinian Authority President Mahmoud Abbas received a standing ovation after presenting one such blood libel story to the European Parliament.
Conspiracy theories
flourish and spread, aided by the ubiquitous internet, on both the left
and right ends of the political spectrum. The term "conspiracy theory"
appears to have become especially popular and mainstream since the
terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001 -- which generated an astounding
number of conspiracy theorists. In fact, the term has become so popular
that these days it is frequently used in politics, particularly in the
context of the current U.S. presidential race, as a means of fending off
criticism.
This method is
particularly efficient because accusing someone of making up conspiracy
theories has the same effect as calling someone a racist: It
immediately reduces the other person to one who is not worth debating or
listening to -- someone beyond the pale, so to speak.
Jews have historically
featured in an astonishing number of conspiracy theories, including
downright blood libels. As recently as this summer, Palestinian
Authority President Mahmoud Abbas received a standing ovation after
presenting one such blood libel story to the European Parliament. A
longer-lived conspiracy theory, which continues to enjoy immense
popularity, is the Protocols of the Elders of Zion, which claims that
the Jews plotted world domination. The story of the protocols has
enjoyed incredible approval in both the West and the Arab world ever
since it was first invented in czarist Russia in 1903. Henry Ford
helped spread it by funding the printing of half a million copies,
which were distributed in the United States in the 1920s. Adolf Hitler,
of course, was one of the theory's greatest devotees and made it a
focal part of his unspeakable crimes against the Jews.
These facts, however,
do not stop completely ordinary people today from entertaining ideas
that are eerily similar to those promulgated in the Protocols of the
Elders of Zion. The only difference is semantic, namely that the word
"Jews" has now been replaced with the word "Israel."
Some of the most
stubborn and popular conspiracy theories in the world today are those
that center on Israel and its actions. However, these conspiracy
theories are rarely called out as such. Instead, we speak in terms of
anti-Semitism, lies and Israel-bashing. All those terms are valid and
appropriate, but arguably, they have lost much of their ability to
impact a public that has grown so used to hearing them that they evoke
few, if any, reactions.
Furthermore, speaking
in the "old" terms of anti-Semitism and Israel-bashing almost
automatically comes with the habitual mistake of Israel advocacy,
namely that it is almost always defensive, reactive, and too polite to
make any kind of lasting difference, especially since Israel's
opponents in this war of words are themselves extremely aggressive,
offensive and with no limits as to how low they will go. While Israel
advocates should not stoop to the bottomless pits of their opponents,
it makes no sense to always be on the defensive and acting like the
teacher's pet, bending over backward in an attempt not to offend
anyone. It is an information war, and one should fight without both
hands being tied behind one's back.
This, then, means that
one should not be afraid to use language that places the burden of proof
on the opponent. Israel's advocates, whether in Israel or abroad,
should not even have defended themselves against one of the most
widespread conspiracy theories -- that Israel is sinisterly practicing
apartheid against Arabs. This theory is so outlandish, so asinine and
obviously fabricated, as anyone who knows even a little about Israel or
has been here can clearly see, that it should not be entertained at
all. Because by even engaging in the slightest with this outrageous
accusation it becomes elevated to the status of a legitimate topic of
civil discussion.
Nevertheless, it has
been given ample and prominent attention in international public debate.
If, at the outset, this theory had been correctly termed a conspiracy
theory propagated by raving lunatics who clearly have no clue about the
true nature of the situation in Israel, it would not be Israel sitting
in the dock defending itself against the lunacy. Instead, it would be
those propagating the craziness, as proponents of a mad conspiracy
theory, who would be under pressure to explain the factual merits of
their theory.
The importance of how
we frame an argument cannot be underestimated. By defending oneself
against outlandish accusations that amount to nothing but conspiracy
theories, one gives them credence just by acknowledging their
existence, and in this way, one unwittingly contributes to their spread.
Words matter immensely,
and how we term something has an impact on how it is perceived. It is
therefore imperative to recognize when an attack against Israel
constitutes a conspiracy theory, and to call it out as such. Few people
wish to be seen as the purveyors of conspiracy theories, as this
immediately reduces them to being seen as lunatics who cannot be taken
seriously. Not only that, but it also forces them to go on the defensive
and explain what makes their insane accusations true.
Judith Bergman
Source: http://www.israelhayom.com/site/newsletter_opinion.php?id=16975
Follow Middle East and Terrorism on Twitter
Copyright - Original materials copyright (c) by the authors.
No comments:
Post a Comment