“Against chutzpah.”
Thoughts on Zionist abuses.
17 OCTOBER—I have been reading a lot these past days about how the Israelis treated those they detained when they illegally boarded the vessels that comprised the now-famous aid flotilla that never made it to Gaza’s shores. The Irish—naturally, given their bitter familiarity with imperial aggressions—gave fulsome accounts of the gratuitous brutality they endured while in Ktzi’ot Prison. Barry Heneghan, a member of the Dáil, the lower house of the Irish legislature, reported afterward that he was “treated like an animal.” Liam Cunningham and Tadhg Hickey, actors and activists, described how they were kicked, spat upon, slapped, zip-tied, and left in the beating Negev Desert sun.
Nothing comes close to the account of her detention Greta Thunberg gave earlier this week to Lisa Röstlund, a reporter for Aftonbladet, a Stockholm daily. This comes to me via Caitlin Johnstone, that Australian force of nature, who published machine-translated extracts in her newsletter Wednesday, the same day Röstlund’s interview with the courageous Swedish activist came out. I had already read of the dehydration, the purposely foul prison food, the bedbugs, the refusal of medical care. Now Thunberg gives the world a long list of “monstrous abuses”—Johnstone’s summarizing phrase—that is beyond infra dig.
Dragged by her hair, incessantly punched and kicked, stripped naked, wrapped in an Israeli flag, sexually humiliated in her own language (lilla hora, “little whore;” hora Greta, “Greta whore”), threatened with gassing (revealing detail, this), uniformed guards all the while taking “selfie” photographs as they stand next to her laughing and jeering: What is this about, what the purpose here?
“They’re like five-year-olds!” Thunberg exclaimed to Röstlund as she recounted all this. No, that’s not it, Greta. They’re like Zionists.
■
As I read Thunberg’s account of her surely criminal mistreatment, my mind went to what may seem the unlikeliest places. I thought of that racist rampage Zionist spectators set themselves upon when they were in Amsterdam a year ago next month to cheer on Maccabi Tel Aviv, an Israeli soccer club, as it faced off with Ajax. (The famous Dutch side trounced Maccabi, 5–0.) And then I thought of Bibi Netanyahu, who has the habit of boasting that he can control the United States and, lately and more specifically, Donald Trump. Al Jazeera reported on this 15 years ago. Max Blumenthal has more recently published various analyses to this effect in The Grayzone. And then I thought of all the terror Israeli soldiers and pilots have inflicted in plain view on the Palestinians of Gaza.
I described the treatment of Greta Thunberg and the other aid flotilla sailors detained at Ktzi’ot as “gratuitous brutality.” I take this back. There was nothing gratuitous in the conduct of Israeli prison guards in that case. Neither was there anything gratuitous about the frenzied riot of Israeli spectators in Amsterdam last 8 November and in days following. Nor in the Israeli prime minister’s more or less public boasts of the power he exerts over the White House. Nor, for that matter, in the stomach-turning spectacle of Israeli soldiers taking delight in their crimes against Gazans.
No, there is a public-display aspect to all of these cases of overreach and barbarism. The conduct of Zionists is meant to be seen—the more unacceptable it may be to civilized sensibilities the more this seems to be so. Those who tormented Greta Thunberg and her colleagues knew the world was watching and wanted the world to watch. When Maccabi spectators ran amok through Amsterdam’s streets shouting “Kill the Arabs,” “Fuck you, Palestine,” “There are no schools in Gaza because there are no children left,” “Let the IDF fuck the Arabs,” and other such niceties, they wanted the world to hear them. Ditto the soldiers on their atrocious mission in Gaza: They take selfies, too, don’t they?
So far as I understand the term, these are examples—extreme cases, surely, but cases nonetheless—of what was known in ancient Hebrew as khátaf, later coming out in Yiddish as khutspe, and then entering English (apparently in the late 19th century, just as the Zionist movement gained momentum) as chutzpah. This term describes a certain kind of conduct toward others and has lots of different definitions. Those possessed of chutzpah are variously impudent, brazen, audacious, abusive, or, as the saying goes, have a lot of gall. Arrogance and the presumption of superiority are implicit in the term.
I will add another connotation for the sake of my point, although I think it holds up well beyond my point. To display one’s chutzpah is to display one’s impunity. By this I mean the person of chutzpah is indifferent to norms, or is attentive to them so as to define his place outside of them. And, just as there is no point to chutzpah if no one can see it—of what use would that be?—the implication here is that one’s impunity must be perfectly evident to all others and the person of chutzpah must be indifferent to what all others may think.
In history chutzpah has been variously cast as an admirable trait in the mode of “gotta be me,” and alternatively as an odious disregard for others. I have always been of the latter persuasion. I find chutzpah in any manifestation—whether it is a case of table manners, the conduct of public discourse, or any other small thing—repellent. It is one thing to liberate oneself from deadening orthodoxies. It is altogether another to hold oneself, garishly and abusively, above others.
There are many ways to think about what the Zionist regime has done these past two years, or about what prison guards just did to Greta Thunberg, or how Israeli soccer fans behaved in Amsterdam, or how Bibi shows off his power over the United States. There is history, there is politics, there is geopolitics, there is the inherent insecurity of a small nation in a region hostile to it since the violence associated with its founding. There is no dismissing any of this.
But I have become convinced these past two years that something larger is at issue. Israel proposes to live and act in the community of nations, I mean to say, not according to law or what we know as morality or common forms of decency but according to what amounts to a biblically authorized project of subjugation and domination in the name of a righteous presumption of Jewish superiority. And with Zionist-nationalist fanatics now in control of the country’s direction, Israel has chosen this moment to insist that the world beyond its borders swallow this project as legitimate in the 21st century.
This is the ultimate in chutzpah, in my interpretation, and as a psychological and characterological question we ought to understand it as such. This phenomenon cannot be understood as distinct from Israel’s idea of itself as exceptional and as the earthly expression of a chosen people. What we know as chutzpah reflects both.
In this connection, the events in Amsterdam a year ago confirmed for me what had been until then an inchoate judgment. As I wrote at the time (in the above-linked piece) of the Israeli soccer hooligans and the vigorous local demonstrations against them:
They were effectively an attempt to transport the extreme to which Israel has taken a premodern, even primitive ideology into a modern milieu and tell the world it must accept it.
This is what makes the mess in Amsterdam significant. And it is why it is important that it turned out to be, indeed, a mess.
To bring the thought up to date, I view all the massive protests against Israel’s barbarous behavior, mostly but not only in Europe, as of like importance. May there be many more of them. Ditto the recent decision of Prabowo Subianto, Indonesia’s president, to refuse visas to Israeli gymnasts who had planned to compete in a championship event in Jakarta Oct. 19–25. Ditto again the announcement Thursday that Israeli spectators will be barred from attending a match on 6 November between Maacabi Tel Aviv and Aston Villa, another English soccer club.
These are acts of refusal, acts of rejection in response to Israel’s genocide, yes. They are also replies to Israel’s utter indifference to law and the norms of humanity in the name of ancient barbarities—to chutzpah on a national scale, the ultimate in chutzpah. They say to Israeli Zionists, Given your barbarous conduct, you cannot be among us.
An earlier version appeared in ScheerPost.
Independent journalism requires investment to sustain itself. Please lend your support. You can become a paid subscriber by clicking on the button below. You can also “buy The Floutist a coffee.” Or you can support our work on Patreon. A big thanks to all who already support us. And please share this post.
Follow us: @thefloutist.
Another astute analysis of a people who know no limits and no shame!
Now, pretend that Russia or any other country that the Empire doesn't like were doing anything comparable. Imagine the worldwide howls of outrage.
But, just as the enemies of the empire can do no right, the empire's pets can do no wrong.