Barking (deliberately) at the Wrong Tree

The following article appeared in Hebrew in Israel Hayom on 30.07.2019 following the murder of a young gay Arab man by a family member. It was written by Tal Gilad. I decided to translate it into English for the sake of the English speaking segment of the Israeli population who are not entirely familiar with the antics of the Israeli Left.

Screaming about gay rights and blaming, even by merely hinting, the religious establishment or the entire Israeli society and holding it responsible for the stabbing of an Arab boy by his family, is akin to demonstrating in front of the Knesset against the crime level in the favelas of Rio De Janeiro.

It is impossible to ignore the obvious: the attack is related to the cultural characteristics of the Arab society. However, anyone who will express it explicitly, will be automatically accused of racism. On the other hand, there did not seem to be a problem to accuse the whole Hareidi society of the terrible murder of Shira Banki, may she rest in peace, despite the fact that among the Hareidi community there does not exist a culture of murder for innumerable “justifications,” starting with family honor and ending  with nationalistic revenge.

For some reason, when one deals with the Arab citizens of Israel, the attitude towards gays is not considered an essential problem that needs an intensive treatment.

On the contrary, one must walk on eggshells in order not to offend them. One should avoid talking about motives, education and mentality.

This globalism, the “we are all guilty,” version, is hypocrisy. Dancing  half naked in the streets of Tel Aviv, you will not change by one inch the kind of education a child gets in the Arab society just as you would not be able to change the level of crime in Rio or the rotation of Earth. These are barks at the wrong tree, except the tree is selected deliberately.

Why? Because the concern for gays clashes with the selective principle of “honoring the other.” On the one hand, there is the constant dwelling on women’s rights. On the other, the right of Arabs to degrade women and demand that they cover themselves with burkas because “it is a cultural matter.” The Left is so tolerant that it does not relate to Arabs as rational people who are supposed to blend and become part of in the country in which they live, but as a remote tribe in the Amazon forests whose life style should not be disturbed by giving it a pair of jeans which might spoil the idyllic nature.

Had we been dealing with a Hareidi boy, the Left would have united in an outrageous demand for a pogrom in Benei Brak. However, when we are dealing with a segment where murder for the sake of family honor or revenge are part of its rule of thumb, suddenly it is forbidden to call the child by its name. I do not know exactly how to process the data in the bug full and contradictory politically correct software.

Obviously, it is also convenient. After all, the Left really does not wish to solve problems. It loves them, seeks them, creates them if in lack of them, thrives on them and benefits from them. This is the essence of the Left, to protest and be furious. Perhaps it is better that way. The position in which the Left is in a festival of abstract theater and the Right is in government -  is pretty normal. The Right is rational and knows that two plus two is four, and the Left demonstrates against it since it is racist that two plus two is four.

At the bottom line though, it will not help to look for the coin under the lamplight merely not to offend the  darkness.