A Brave New World segment
Compassion-(noun) sympathetic concern for the sufferings of others
Do unto others and so forth…right? The halls and walls of kindergartens everywhere are bedecked with this slogan, meant to guide the preciously precocious as they start out in life. Each child (ideally) respects one another out of the compassion felt for others and the desire to be respected in turn. If only humanitarian crisis, political agenda and foreign policy followed this roadmap of the golden rule. If only…
Enough with the fluff.
It was not long after the shooting began that protesters took to the streets. Israel had retaliated against the aggression of Hamas and decimated another section of the Palestinian population. The casualties grew, ever-more lopsided in Israel’s favor. What was previously only latent resentment became open anti-semitism, complete with attacks on synagogues and Jewish businesses Out came the cries of genocide and unwarranted violence against the helpless Palestinian civilian population.
The protesters would see Israel retreat and allow Hamas to attack. They would have Israel share its defenses with its enemies while condemning it for making such defensive advances in the first place. Utilize the technology of the Jews in order to wipe the Jews from existence. All the while, Hamas uses these helpless civilians as fodder to protect its weapons.
This type of hypocritical protest is an emotional dilemma I dub Convenient Compassion. Now compassion is supposed to be comprised of empathy and action based upon the mutual bond of humanity. Tragedies, injustice and great suffering compel human beings to act on behalf of other human beings. Convenient Compassion allows people, like those desecrating the synagogues of Paris, to simultaneously believe that Israel is an evil aggressor AND that further violence is warranted in revenge. (Not violence deemed necessary to confront a great evil but violence to destroy the private property of Jews thousands of miles away)
Convenient compassion makes allowances for public outbursts against the “genocide” of Palestinians while ignoring the Christians who have lived in Iraq for two thousand years and are now being exterminated by another Arab terrorist group, ISIS. It permits the selective criticism of the destruction wrought by Israeli attacks while possessing no comment on the charter of Hamas which reads in part “so-called peaceful solutions and international conferences, are in contradiction to the principles of the Islamic Resistance Movement”. It demands that the world recognize an independent nation for the Palestinian people (this demand is mostly directed towards the United States since the U.N. is already considering a Palestinian state) while simultaneously silently supporting the calls by Hamas and Iran for the unmerciful destruction of the Jewish state.
Convenient compassion is the emotional cousin of the intellectual idea of moral relativity. It attempts to create a subjective gray area and issue a moral blank check to the Palestinian thugs masquerading as leaders. Good and bad, right and wrong, positive and negative are supposedly only states of being, dependent on the perspective of the individual or group in question. There is no objective morality and therefore no right and wrong. Compassion is only felt when it is a convenient outlet for hostility, in this case against Israel. (and the United States as her ally) Hamas is permitted to engage in hostilities and break cease-fire agreements while Israel is supposed respect the rights of those dedicated to her destruction.
Contrary to these invertebrate beliefs, there is a right, there is a wrong and it is not so convenient to the moral relativists. Israel exists and the living have an obligation to themselves to protect life. Hiding behind children while launching rockets is the act of a coward (Hamas). Blaming the retaliatory actions of those who warn and then follow through with their word (Israel) and fire into that crowd is the act of a delusional coward*. Supporting one terrorist group and ignoring another is oblivious (at best) and demanding peace while supporting the side that wants war is in-credible.
Convenient compassion contemptibly corrupts the circumstances of a situation that is actually quite simple. One side wants the other side dead. False accusations of hate, genocide and persecution thinly veil this pervasive motive. However, one must be careful with such accusations. As another ubiquitous aphorism of kindergarten states: when you point your finger, there are three more pointing back at you.
The truth is that if Israel were to put down its arms there would be no more Israel. If the Arabs were to put down their arms there would be no more war – Benjamin Netanyahu
*the rational explanation for my accusation of cowardice is that the rocketeer is forcing the children into a situation that imperils lives other than his own and attempting to justify the actions using an ideology that seeks to destroy an entire group of people.