When the WGA went on strike earlier this year, I was miffed for an entirely selfish reason: I get almost all of my news from places that employ writers, like The Daily Show and Steven Colbert on The Late Show. Just as when the coronavirus first hit, I was abruptly plunged into a news-free zone. As I noted back then:
Sure, I could sit around and watch CNN or something along those lines, but I gotta tell you: I spent a long time doing that right after 9/11, and all I got for it was way more stressed and not particularly more well-informed. In fact, study after study has shown that “fake news” shows such as The Daily Show produce more well-informed viewers than almost any other outlet. So right now I’m losing not only my major source of news about the world, but also the coping mechanism I was using to deal with the stress of said news: being able to laugh at it.
During this year’s stoppage, I found some new outlets, mostly on YouTube, where creators are not writing for the AMPTP, so the strike allowed them to continue. Most of them, however, were not nearly amusing enough. I’ve grown somewhat fond of Brian Tyler Cohen, for instance, but there’s no denying that he’s not only a radical liberal (which I don’t mind so much), but also a staunch Democrat (which I’m far less tolerant of). Generally speaking, the Democrats are not nearly as liberal/progressive as I’d like, and they fuck up just as badly as the Republicans (case in point: Bob Menendez). Then there are the “dirtbag left” and their less extreme offshoots, who will happil
But now the strike is over, and Colbert is back, Meyers is back, Oliver is back, and The Daily Show will be back tomorrow night. And just in time for the most violent flare-up between Israel and Palestine in decades; by the time it’s ove
I think the main source of the problem is, perhaps more than any other hot-button issue in the United State
Except I reject this false dichotomy. I do not stand with Israel, nor do I stand with Hamas (or any of the other Paletinian terrorist groups-du-jour). I stand with the innocent civilians.
Numbers are hard to pin down, but the United Nations says that “More than 1,200 Israelis and foreign nationals, the majority of whom were civilians, were reportedly killed ...” and that ”... at least 1,100 Palestinians have been killed, including older persons and 290 children ...” ABC News reports that “In Israel, at least 1,300 people have been killed ...” and that “Palestinian authorities said at least 2,329 people have been killed ...” Would it really be so controversial to posit that killing innocent civilians is bad, regardless of which side is doing it?
This conflict has been going on so long that people don’t even bother going back to its beginning in their lists any more: the United Nations lists casualties only going back as far as 2008; Wikpedia’s list of military operations headed “Gaza-Israel conflict” only goes back to 2006 (and has 21 entries in those 18 years). But, trying to extrapolate from Wikipedia’s timeline, I think there have been more than 50 incidents just in my lifetime
And I understand the issues of conflating the state of Israel with the Jewish people, but I don’t think it’s antisemitic to criticize the government of Israel. If it were, there would quite a few antisemitc Jews these days: Jon Stewart has done some of this, not to mention there’s an entire organization of Jews for whom it is the raison d’être. But it’s harder for non-Jewish people (such as myself) to do so. In fact, there are, bizarrely, actual laws in 35 states (including my own) saying that you’re not allowed to boycott Israel in protest of its policies. You know where it’s not illegal to protest Israel? Israel. Many Israeli newspapers have been extremely critical of Netanyahu in particular, which is only sensible: in a democracy, people are supposed to be critical of their governments. They are supposed to hold them accountable. There are no laws in the US about not being able to protest the US government (probably), but it’s okay to make it illegal to protest other countries’ governments? It’s just surreal.
Meanwhile the Palestinians have the opposite problem: too often the face of their people is a group like Hamas (or Hezbollah, or Fatah, or the PLO, or ...), which everybody condemns, and rightfully so. But condemning a terrorist group that operates in a country is not the same as condemning the people of that country, and expressing support for the people is not the same as expressing support for the terrorist group. Netanyahu has said that “the enemy will pay an unprecedented price”; does that mean that Hamas will pay this price? Because it sure seems like it’s the Palestinian people paying it right now. If the Israelis wanted to hunt down every single Hamas soldier who participated in this henious attack on their country, who would speak out against them? But bombing innocent civilians back to the stone age because of the actions of some madmen who claim to speak for them? Does that really seem “justified”?
So I would like to take the (hopefully!) uncontroversial stance that people in both Israel and Palestine have the right to live their lives without fear of being shot, kidnapped, or bombed. I dunno ... that just seems like common sens
Even More News, the current news discussion podcast from the Some More News folks that I mentioned way back at the beginning of this post, had an almost entirely humor-free discussion of the current situation in Israel and Palestine that you could check out for more in depth discussion. The episode of Some More News that they reference is actually two years old at this point, but (as Cody says) it’s eerily relevant to today’s news, so you should probably watch that. The older video does lean more towards the Palestine side, but the recent podcast is more balanced. And all the information is good regardless.
No comments:
Post a Comment