The Palestinians' "war on reality" turns factual truths into "social facts" which appeal to emotions and personal beliefs in much more powerful, persuasive ways than do appeals to objective facts.
What a thoughtful and well reasoned analysis. Your outlining of the mechanisms of distorting facts is superb. It’s worth mentioning that this approach is in line with “post modernism” and other such paradigms that hold that there is no objective truth but only competing narratives, and the “right” one is the one, as you mentioned, that makes you feel better. Unfortunately most people falling prey to these methods lack the basic critical thinking skills to challenge themselves.
Another, amazing, and thoughtful article, Joshua. This would be a wonderful response to Mr. G's totally biased article on the war and Israel. Having watched mutiple videos between Pro Israel and Pro Hamas supporters, two in particular were interesting. Mustafa Barghouti and several other Pal supporters are starting to use the DEI intersectionality lingo. Without reference to anything that had been discussed, Barghouti attempted to attack the others and Israel by saying they were "white supremacists." It was almost funny, not surprising, but absurd that they are adopting the DEI narrative, courtesy of US Progressives. The Palestinians have been using the one aspect of DEI and critical theory long before it became a trend. They've been pushing the oppressed/oppressor card for years. Their nakba? They were responsible for their "nakba." There are articles I've read whereby the Arab writer has stated that the Palestinians "welcomed" the Jews, the Jews lived "peacefully" in Arab countries. If only we could prevent the publishing of lies in the same way Claudine Gay was called out for plagiarism. Until we can eliminate post truth, the past will be dismissed with new, revised stories to create and the indoctrinated, uni students will continue to accept the Progressive doctrine.
In one of my previous comments I suggested a line of communications counter-attack, involving - among other things - getting celebrities who previously endorsed the Palestinian cause - to now endorse Israel and dispel pro-Palestinian lies. Preferably they should be people "of color", who the woke pro-Palestinians supporters tend to believe more readily than whites. Not easy, but possible if there is a will to find them. Another approach is to lean heavily on universities who continue to allow anti-Israel protesting and the teaching of critical race and gender theory without proper critique of this woke dogma. I mean beseech donors of all sizes and pocketbooks to deny these schools funds. Israel/Jew hatred, anti-colonialism, reverse bigotry against whites of European ancestry, cancel culture are inextricably part of critical theory - and critical theory is inextricably linked with the Palestinian propaganda machine. Unfortunately, this woke dogma is the hegemony now; among young people generally and particularly among youth "of color" and even LGBTQ. (You must have seen those "Queers for Palestine" signs. These protestors were clearly brainwashed to the extent that they are supporting a people who would kill them on sight for their sexual identity!) We can try to find allies; we can deny funds to the academic propaganda centers but truthfully, this is a lost generation we will never sufficiently reach with facts; since facts aren't what is motivating them. A sense of "deprivation and grievance" (real or imagined) is. They are operating at the intellectual level of toddlers. So what to do? Try to reach the more intellectually gifted ones but overall, DON'T SWEAT IT. Limit their actions where possible. Try to stop the flow of lies being fed into their muddled grey matter in schools (and social media). And win the war. The war on the ground. The war in cyberspace that controls defense, offense, essential services and the flow of money. Eventually the Palestinians and their puppet-masters will lose. And even if the world pities losers, it won't support them.
While I agree with much of what you are saying here, your use of Durkheim and social facts is simply wrong and does a disservice to both sociology and the points you are making. Durkheim's social facts the deep, implicit, taken-for-granted societal structures that shape what we do. Driving on the right side of the road is a social fact. Living by an effectively Christian calendar is a social fact.
One could argue that the encoded antisemitic tropes that lie dormant--or not--are social facts (I'm not sure Deborah Lipstadt uses that language, but her work could easily be used to make that case).
There are better ways to describe the false narrative currently spreading like a disease (actually "false narrative" works perfectly well).
While every field has jargon as shortcuts for practitioners, when that jargon overlaps with common usage the result can be pretty awful--think of the different ways "theory" gets used, for example. Durkheim's use of "social" is a similar example. Do I love the jargon? No. Do I think sociologists have an obligation to clarify that jargon? When yes and no. Certainly when writing for an educated lay audience. But equally, those who seek out that knowledge need to do due diligence as well.
I think that the palestinians are definitely playing the long game, and they're very good at it. But all good things must come to an end, and that is a reality that not even they can control. I think that, as you've been writing so eloquently and repeatedly now, Joshua, this war is different because its success for Israel spells disaster for a whole lot of high ranking dirt-bag antisemites at the UN, and perhaps not necessarily confined to this one issue. And I think that Israel will ultimately exact a decisive and pivotal victory, or we're done for. So what would potentially happen of course, as usual, is half-hearted reckonings by virtue signaling politicians, and on and on. But those half-measures matter nonetheless. The best example I can think of is all those bankers who not only got away with it but got their bonuses despite the DOJ having all the evidence it needed to put them all away for a very long time. My point is that naturally not everything will be corrected and no true justice will be served by any stretch because that's not how the world works. Though the latter did, at the very least, lead to the creation of the Dodd-Frank reform, which again, doesn't address everything, it nevertheless moved change. I feel like that's quite possible, with today's perspective. Or I'm very hopeful. On that note, I am hopeful that Israel doesn't budge. Might be Bibi's redemption before retirement.
What a thoughtful and well reasoned analysis. Your outlining of the mechanisms of distorting facts is superb. It’s worth mentioning that this approach is in line with “post modernism” and other such paradigms that hold that there is no objective truth but only competing narratives, and the “right” one is the one, as you mentioned, that makes you feel better. Unfortunately most people falling prey to these methods lack the basic critical thinking skills to challenge themselves.
Another, amazing, and thoughtful article, Joshua. This would be a wonderful response to Mr. G's totally biased article on the war and Israel. Having watched mutiple videos between Pro Israel and Pro Hamas supporters, two in particular were interesting. Mustafa Barghouti and several other Pal supporters are starting to use the DEI intersectionality lingo. Without reference to anything that had been discussed, Barghouti attempted to attack the others and Israel by saying they were "white supremacists." It was almost funny, not surprising, but absurd that they are adopting the DEI narrative, courtesy of US Progressives. The Palestinians have been using the one aspect of DEI and critical theory long before it became a trend. They've been pushing the oppressed/oppressor card for years. Their nakba? They were responsible for their "nakba." There are articles I've read whereby the Arab writer has stated that the Palestinians "welcomed" the Jews, the Jews lived "peacefully" in Arab countries. If only we could prevent the publishing of lies in the same way Claudine Gay was called out for plagiarism. Until we can eliminate post truth, the past will be dismissed with new, revised stories to create and the indoctrinated, uni students will continue to accept the Progressive doctrine.
In one of my previous comments I suggested a line of communications counter-attack, involving - among other things - getting celebrities who previously endorsed the Palestinian cause - to now endorse Israel and dispel pro-Palestinian lies. Preferably they should be people "of color", who the woke pro-Palestinians supporters tend to believe more readily than whites. Not easy, but possible if there is a will to find them. Another approach is to lean heavily on universities who continue to allow anti-Israel protesting and the teaching of critical race and gender theory without proper critique of this woke dogma. I mean beseech donors of all sizes and pocketbooks to deny these schools funds. Israel/Jew hatred, anti-colonialism, reverse bigotry against whites of European ancestry, cancel culture are inextricably part of critical theory - and critical theory is inextricably linked with the Palestinian propaganda machine. Unfortunately, this woke dogma is the hegemony now; among young people generally and particularly among youth "of color" and even LGBTQ. (You must have seen those "Queers for Palestine" signs. These protestors were clearly brainwashed to the extent that they are supporting a people who would kill them on sight for their sexual identity!) We can try to find allies; we can deny funds to the academic propaganda centers but truthfully, this is a lost generation we will never sufficiently reach with facts; since facts aren't what is motivating them. A sense of "deprivation and grievance" (real or imagined) is. They are operating at the intellectual level of toddlers. So what to do? Try to reach the more intellectually gifted ones but overall, DON'T SWEAT IT. Limit their actions where possible. Try to stop the flow of lies being fed into their muddled grey matter in schools (and social media). And win the war. The war on the ground. The war in cyberspace that controls defense, offense, essential services and the flow of money. Eventually the Palestinians and their puppet-masters will lose. And even if the world pities losers, it won't support them.
While I agree with much of what you are saying here, your use of Durkheim and social facts is simply wrong and does a disservice to both sociology and the points you are making. Durkheim's social facts the deep, implicit, taken-for-granted societal structures that shape what we do. Driving on the right side of the road is a social fact. Living by an effectively Christian calendar is a social fact.
One could argue that the encoded antisemitic tropes that lie dormant--or not--are social facts (I'm not sure Deborah Lipstadt uses that language, but her work could easily be used to make that case).
There are better ways to describe the false narrative currently spreading like a disease (actually "false narrative" works perfectly well).
While every field has jargon as shortcuts for practitioners, when that jargon overlaps with common usage the result can be pretty awful--think of the different ways "theory" gets used, for example. Durkheim's use of "social" is a similar example. Do I love the jargon? No. Do I think sociologists have an obligation to clarify that jargon? When yes and no. Certainly when writing for an educated lay audience. But equally, those who seek out that knowledge need to do due diligence as well.
I think that the palestinians are definitely playing the long game, and they're very good at it. But all good things must come to an end, and that is a reality that not even they can control. I think that, as you've been writing so eloquently and repeatedly now, Joshua, this war is different because its success for Israel spells disaster for a whole lot of high ranking dirt-bag antisemites at the UN, and perhaps not necessarily confined to this one issue. And I think that Israel will ultimately exact a decisive and pivotal victory, or we're done for. So what would potentially happen of course, as usual, is half-hearted reckonings by virtue signaling politicians, and on and on. But those half-measures matter nonetheless. The best example I can think of is all those bankers who not only got away with it but got their bonuses despite the DOJ having all the evidence it needed to put them all away for a very long time. My point is that naturally not everything will be corrected and no true justice will be served by any stretch because that's not how the world works. Though the latter did, at the very least, lead to the creation of the Dodd-Frank reform, which again, doesn't address everything, it nevertheless moved change. I feel like that's quite possible, with today's perspective. Or I'm very hopeful. On that note, I am hopeful that Israel doesn't budge. Might be Bibi's redemption before retirement.