Let me start off by noting that I had a great deal of respect for Josh Marshall - indeed, I still do even if it is substantially reduced from before. He was a pioneer in independent subscriber powered news, TPM was and is an outlet that eschews most of the worst sins of mainstream media. It's an outlet where you won't find "both sides" takes or beat sweeteners and it usually has a perspective that's not twisted by Beltway Bubble or alt-right grifter mentality. And despite not hewing to the acceptable norms of what now passes for "journalism" (e.g. comforting the comfortable and afflicting the afflicted) - TPM has garnered a great deal of success. That's very impressive. But Marshall's recent decent into unhinged hippie punching over Gaza and Israel is just completely crazy to me.
It seems to me that - even with current events as they are - his priorities are something like:
The worst - The threat of antisemitism from college kids
Almost as bad - Hamas
Just barely below that - Netanyahu and his fascist right-wing government
HUGE GAP
The fact that tens of thousands of Gazans have been violently killed.
Now I personally find it unbelievably unlikely that this is how he actually sees things. He's not an idiot. But based on his commentary - almost the only times he mentions the harm in Gaza is as part of an attack on pro-Palestine activists. It's more often than not along the lines of "what's happened in Gaza is bad enough that you shouldn't lie about it - and lying about it makes you an antisemite" with the implication that antisemitism (from protestors who are being ignored by their governments) is an unforgivable sin that's way worse than using mass starvation of civilians as a weapon of war.
It's really fucking bonkers actually. He clearly recognizes and acknowledges the harm Israel has inflicted on Gaza. He also has possibly a lower opinion of the Israeli War Cabinet than even I do. But the mere suggestion that Israel might possibly be engaged in genocide breaks him and he immediately categorizes you as human filth, and he will ignore your arguments because you're being mad and need to wipe the spittle from your mouth.
It's like he has vested a ton of his identity into upholding the basic axiom - Israel CANNOT EVER be guilty of genocide. Period. No matter what.
Does he think that the current batch of Israeli leaders are not capable of genocide? I doubt it. He despises Netanyahu and recognizes that the fringe assholes in the war cabinet are worse. Does he deny the harm that's happening in Gaza? No - I think he has acknowledged that it is ethnic cleansing. Perhaps he might think the degree of harm hasn't risen to the level of "genocide" yet - but if this were the case, the way he reacts at the suggestion indicates that sees the gap between what's happening in Gaza and the minimum harm to count as "genocide" is so big that you could see it from space.
So what's the deal here? He's so adamantly opposed to the idea that genocide is happening in Gaza that anyone who says it's possible is unquestionably antisemitic. Despite the fact that he acknowledges that a massive amount of harm has befallen Gaza at the hands of Israel, and that Israel's leaders are fucking shitweasels of the worst kind.
The only answer I have is that it's existential for him. Israel CANNOT EVER be guilty of genocide is a core tenet of his worldview. It's a fundamental truth that is immune to observable facts.
A few days ago he promoted a ludicrous assertion as to why the blatant and clear statements of genocidal intent from Israeli leaders do not qualify as genocidal intent. It's was a little more thought out than "it's just a prank, bro" - but not by much. Essentially it's this - Jews just talk that way. They make outrageous statements without meaning them. Part of how they decide shit is by articulating these extreme conditions so they can weigh even the unthinkable options when making important decisions.
Just fucking bonkers. Look - even if you buy into this excuse, which is some really extreme special pleading - you still have to accept that maybe there's a chance that it's not just academic speculation. That there is a possibility that these statements are serious and honest expressions of intent. Isn't that fair - when someone says something, you have to accept that there's at least a possibility that they are saying what they mean. Otherwise it's like MSM talking heads handwaving Trump's declarations of being a dictator who intends on abusing the office for petty revenge - "because reasons".
And the facts just bear it out. There's video evidence of IDF soldiers repeating the same statements the leaders have made. That language IS filtering down to the troops. Netanyahu's invocation of Amalek was directed at soldiers and the soldiers have been rallying around it as they blow up entire neighbourhoods. AND on top of that - not preventing genocide from happening is also considered genocide - and Israel is doing sweet fuck all to clamp down on the open calls for the complete destruction of Gaza. Does this not count as reasonable argument? Apparently, no - it does not. As per Talking Pants - accusations of genocide are pure antisemitism. In his view - there is no credible or reasonable argument for it, and it can only be motivated by Jew hatred.
No comments:
Post a Comment