Challenging Israel's Right to Exist Responsibly
by Stephen Lendman
These type issues need to be raised.
Israel's a rogue terror state. It's been so from inception. Its leaders' hands are blood-drenched. They're responsible for decades of high crimes.
A rare New York Times Opinionator piece challenged Israel's right to exist. It did so responsibly. Joseph Levine wrote it. He "was raised in a strongly Jewish environment."
He's not a self-hating Jew. Saying so about anyone is oxymoronic. It's offensive and wrongheaded.
Levine's a University of Massachusetts Professor of Philosophy. His interest areas include Philosophy of Mind, Philosophy of Language, and Metaphysics.
His Times piece was bold and honest. He headlined " On Questioning the Jewish State ."
He was taught growing up believing "Israel has a right to exist." Most critics feel the same way. Mainstream consensus claims denying it reflects anti-Semitism. It's not a people of conscience option, they claim.
Since when was free-thinking outlawed? Why should consensus views subvert others?
Debates are a longstanding tradition. Genuine ones air views freely. Beliefs are challenged. Truths are sought.
Critical thinking is stimulated. Opinions are formed. Conclusions are reached. It's done through free and open dialogue and discussion.
One size doesn't fit all. One view alone doesn't wash. Challenging them on vital issues matters. Bolding going where others won't dare is courageous.
Levine did so publicly. To their credit, Times editors gave him space.
"Over the years," he said, "I came to question this consensus and to see that the general fealty to it has seriously constrained open debate on the issue, one of vital importance not just to the people directly involved - Israelis and Palestinians - but to the conduct of our own foreign policy and, more important, to the safety of the world at large."