Race? Of Course Not

The events in the Middle East are generating much discussion at present. As a matter of history, academic history, there can be no question that the Jews have no superior or un-debatable eternal exclusive claim of right to possess that geography. There can be no debate that the European holocaust, as horrific as it was, does not change the fact that the State of Israel began and continues as an act of pure conquest and usurpation. And in fact, as uncomfortable as it is, represents the continued historic trend of the last millennia, of white people taking stuff from brown people justified by their own self-serving, self-invented mythology.

Many will want to deny or discount the racial aspect embedded in the calculus of justifications, because to exclude this allows the other so-called “complexities” to render the debate “insoluble” via reason, or law, or common decency, and as always will resolve to the benefit of the party with the greatest military strength. Kareem Abdul Jabaar has recently and correctly observed that, “More white believe in the existence of ghosts than in the existence of racism”.

Still, why is it relevant to insert the “fabled” bogeyman of racism into a conflict that many would prefer to characterize as solely a political tussle, the conflicting prerogatives of political entities? It is relevant because the DNA of consciousness of European and Western powers have so mutated in the past several hundred years that there is an intractable subconscious belief that “white is right”. And that begs the question, have you ever seen an Israeli Prime Minister, Foreign Minister, Defense Minister, General or Ambassador who wasn’t bright white? It is a subtle convenience for the racist agenda to classify Europeans situated in Israel as Jews rather than white when the wrestle for wealth, power, or land is extramural rather than intramural. If the opponent or victims are brown, it is preferable not to have it thought of as a “white thing”.

But if a claim is being presented based on heritage and nativity to the region, why aren’t any other people native to the region “white”? How did the brown people ejected during the diaspora, fairly insular, prone to marry and reproduce within the tribe, turn white? For the purposes of this discussion the explanation of that phenomena is less important than the recognition of the phenomena, because I contend, that Europeans and Americans, religious beliefs notwithstanding and more appropriate for affairs in Heaven than on earth, and being largely ignorant of the actual history of the region, tend to reflexively grant superior moral and civil authority to other white people.

Is this an extreme argument? Well then, what rational process allows Americans particularly, supposedly reflected by acts and policies of their elected representatives, to so overwhelmingly concur that the Palestinians can’t and shouldn’t have a State and a homeland in the land where they have continuously resided since history, pre-Biblical, Biblical, and academic, was first writ?

Again, I contend, that if both the Israelis and the Palestinians were brown, the demands of rational fairness and intellectual honesty would mitigate American policy, and even the moral tenor of what is perceived as our strategic interest would reflect more political and philosophic balance than is presently exhibited in our bizarre, immoral and grossly lopsided preference for an entitled Israel.

If the effect of mirrored racism , to the degree it impacts the thoughts and decisions of our leaders, is ignored or ridiculed as fantasy, the ultimate prospects for justice and peace will fall victim to obvious injustice, and the dove of peace will not have a branch to rest upon.