One of the most common accusations I receive from readers on the left — for example, when discussing why a certain segment of voters likes Donald Trump, or why people are alarmed about Joe Biden’s potential corruption and concerned about his accelerating senility — is of “both-sidesism.” For those unfamiliar, this is a common term for the purported moral error of news analysis that makes the mistake of trying to “balance” something obviously good against something transparently evil. (“Adorable Kittens vs. Crushing Adorable Kittens: The Debate Continues.”) If the concept has any merit at all, it’s wholly inapplicable to all but the most extreme situations in American politics, and America, despite its numerous miseries over the years, is not subject to occasional wars of attempted annihilation.
So why do these same people retreat immediately into the very “both-sidesism” they otherwise criticize disgustedly, when the matter turns to Israel? Why were the first words out of so many people’s mouths this past weekend a pro forma condemnation of Hamas’s sneak attack used as prelude to the more important issue of how Israel brought this upon itself and should not defend itself against what is clearly an ongoing and rapidly developing threat? No, this isn’t Israel’s 9/11, this isn’t even quite analogous to the Yom Kippur War of 1973; it is far worse. The number of dead will likely turn out to be over a thousand — imagine if America had lost 30,000 mostly civilian lives on 9/11 instead of 3,000, with a further 2,000 carried away by al Qaeda to a nightmarish fate.
Comments