The main topic here was cultural boycott in connection with Alice walker refusing to allow a run-of-the-mill israeli publisher to offer a Hebrew translation. I agreed with this course of action and commented that I upped the ante in my own case by not speaking the language any longer. Since I and my preferences are not the subject here I really said all I was going to here.

Obviously I am coming from a place where I don’t believe israelis are persuadable by any argument i could advance or by ms. walker’s books. So yes, I gave up on the israeli collective though I have nothing but respect for those who fight the uphill battle of trying to influence their society.

I really prefer not to discuss traumas at this point – relative or absolute. Maybe another time when the topic is right.

The psychology of trauma as distinct from the psychology of political movement, or argument.

Their trauma is not of the brainwashing theme that you alluded to, though I’m sure that that is a component later. The trauma is constructed of over stimulation, and repeated experience of fear, not the propagation of fear. I identify two stimuli going at the same time. One is the air raid sirens. The second is the result of an over-stimulating commercial culture, similar to New Yorkers or residents of Cairo or Kalicut, experience a degree of background traumatization.

To address your point about why a traumatized people are not usually appealable to reason, and desire a very very low incident rate.

Its inherent in the psychology of trauma, as distinct from the psychology of response to reasoned argument.

The conditioned responses (not intentionally conditioned as in brainwashing), get imprinted much deeper as a pain that is replayed semi-consciously reinforcing the pain/avoidance response.

If it were only brain-washing then alternative stimuli could be constructed. Different media messages (not Orwellian shifts of stimuli) that were more benign, could change the thinking about the other, to a sequence of distant acceptance, then more close acceptance, then friendship.

There is equivalence in trauma. Trauma is not a degree oriented dynamic. It doesn’t matter which is worse, its an off/on one. Stimulated or not stimulated, so long as the traumatic process is what governs the range of responses and behaviors.

The verbal assaults by the left, are also traumatic triggers. They stimulate a response that is in the traumatic zone, not in the rational reasoning zone, you know reaction.

Continuing that dynamic, one community seeking to traumatize the other in response to being traumatized themselves, neither makes peace nor in practice ANY change.

I would hope that you get to a place where you desire change in the relations more than more justifiable stimulations to anger.

Good leadership in governance, AND in dissent, would defuse animosities and construct relationships that are more benign than currently. Anger or fear is then just information to use for a rational benign strategy.

Escalation towards forcing the other to comply, would be avoided. Facilitating environments where people can be listened to, would be adopted.

So, the cultural boycott movement accompanied by angry dismissal of the Israeli other, would be rejected in favor of assertive engagement movement.

Peace is DIFFERENT than victory. Peace is mutual well-being.

I’d be happy to reply if I only knew what you mean. Care to clarify?

Are you drawing an equation between israeli and Palestinian traumas? if so, I’m not sure what that signifies.

But here is something (and I totally don’t mean to open an argument on this here since it’s OT): We know what a continuous dose of trauma-inducing education from childhood does to Israelis. basically it’s made them fearful, vengeful and amazingly close minded (speaking generally now. Exceptions noted). Would it do the same to Palestinians? well, let’s find out, shall we? end the occupation and we’ll see how the palestinians behave (assuming reasonable terms on refugees can be agreed upon, ie, some to return, some to be hugely compensated, some to be allowed to go to the US, as apology for it having acquiesced to keeping them under the gun for so long. And of course, as a gesture of good will. Hopefully, some to live next door to you, Witty – I’m sure you’d find them perfectly nice).

All of which makes for a fine hypothetical. But reality is that the israelis will do what they want to so we haven’t seen any end to the Palestinians’ trauma. In fact, I suspect the worst is yet to come. So let’s not draw parallels just yet….

As for the stuff about the US going to war on Israel’s behalf. This too is nonsense. The US goes to war against its own enemies in its own interests. Everything else is conspiratorial junk by Americans who are too weak to see their own country for what it is and must find someone else to blame. Hell, feel free to pick up some Chomsky on the subject.