Sam Harris

This week I listened to the first hour of Sam Harris's latest podcast with Douglas Murray and Joseph Szeps, the part available on YouTube. I've always found Harris to be a thoughtful and articulate public intellectual on a host of subjects, although admittedly, I've never read any of his books. A neuroscientist, he came to prominence as a professed atheist, a moral rationalist and a promoter of clear thought through the regular practice of meditation. Lately, I've been particularly interested in how he has been thinking about the war in Gaza and the moral quagmire Israel finds itself in while prosecuting the conflict. His position has been consistent and steadfast throughout. He supports Israel unequivocally. But its not because it's Israel ie. not because he's Jewish and it's a Jewish state. He says he'd support Denmark if they were the country engaged in this conflict. He supports Israel because he believes that the battle they are fighting is for civilization. It's a battle against Jihadism, a religious death cult, and an ideology that is contrary to any basic moral standard of human decency. He argues that this is the correct way to view an opposition who straps explosive devices to their children to turn them into suicide bombers, and who teaches children to die as martyrs as the ultimate heroism. Harris is incensed by the way 'supposedly educated and smart' westerners have lost their moral bearings by siding with such people. In the first 10 minutes of the podcast he summarizes his position succinctly. Perhaps most surprising to my ears is when he compares Hamas to the Nazis. He argues that if we can legitimately justify the bombing of Dresden, which killed more than 30,000 ordinary German citizens, surely the killing of thousands of innocent Palestinians is justified, because Hamas is worse than the Nazis. The Nazis did not weaponize their citizens by using them as human shields. They did not use hospitals and elementary schools as rocket-launch sites. They did not build tunnels to turn residential areas into military infrastructure. It appears that for Harris, with western civilization at stake, any means of defeating Hamas, no matter what the cost, is warranted. The World Central Kitchen attack was a tragic mistake, he says. In war there are always tragic mistakes. 

I agree with much of what Harris says, and my support of Israel is as steadfast as his. Hamas must be defeated for all the reasons he describes in terms of the ideology they represent and threat to western values. They cannot be permitted to survive in any functional way. But unlike Harris I also support the war because I support Israel. I believe Hamas must be defeated because they are a threat to the Jewish state. This is an existential war for Israel. Where I differ most with Harris is the way he conflates Hamas with the Palestinian people. He argues that Palestinians support Hamas and the barbaric acts they committed on October 7th. This is indisputable based on recent polling. But reliable polls taken just prior to October 7th in Gaza indicated that Hamas was extremely unpopular. It's not unexpected that during a conflict, and in this case one in which you are pummelled into homelessness and starvation, the population would rally around their perceived 'defenders'. What we know about Hamas is that they were feared by Gazans and ruled without election and with an iron fist. They corruptly deprived Gaza of resources for almost two decades, and used whatever they could steal to turn the territory into a military facility and to line their own pockets. We also know that Hamas is a proxy for Iran. Under such circumstances, any reasonable person needs to question the extent to which ordinary Palestinians can be held culpable for the actions of Hamas. Is the analogy to Germany during World War 2 even remotely applicable here? Hitler and the Nazis were broadly popular with Germans and they actively supported the war effort enthusiastically at all levels of society. The Nazi government marshalled all of the powers of the state to prosecute their war of expansion. In the very last stage of the war, when the Wehrmacht was in shambles and Berlin encircled, the Nazis called upon the Volkssturm, the ragtag national citizen militia comprised of ordinary citizens, from high-school age to retirees, to fight the Red Army in the streets, and they did. The culpability of everyday Germans is inarguable. How can one use the same standard of culpability for what is happening to the population of Gaza? 

But there's another comment made by Harris and Murray which has been accepted as a given, but with which I take issue: That the IDF (and by extension Israel) is held to a higher moral standard than other countries (hence there is anti-Semitism at play). They cite other horrific conflicts and attrocities taking place around the world that are not given anywhere near the same scrutiny as Gaza. That there is greater scrutiny of this conflict is undeniable. But in my view it's for a host of reasons that make this conflict unusual and one-of-a-kind, that has nothing to do with any moral double-standard or anti-Semitism. Israel possesses unique geographical, religious and historical significance that merits unique international attention. This conflict is not a civil war in Syria or Sudan. In the west we simply have no political reason to care as much about those types of conflicts regardless of the attrocities being committed, especially when they are in Africa. Conflicts on continental Europe are always of greater political concern. For example, we have a lot more reason to care about the war of aggression waged by Putin against Ukraine. We were properly outraged by Putin's barbaric targeting of apartment buildings, theaters and hospitals in Mariupol. Remember how we cared about the war in the Balkans and were horrified by the genocidal slaughter of 8,000 Bosnian Muslims in Srebrenica in 1995? The Serbian perpetrators were doggedly pursued and eventually brought to the ICJ (International Court of Justice). No Jews involved there. Israel is subject to the same standard of behaviour during wartime as any other signatory to international treaties and conventions. But one also has to consider that the Palestinians are unique. They have been wards of the international community since 1948 and have special status at the UN as multi-generational refugees. The Palestinians have waged a successful campaign for decades to situate themselves in the global conscience as a symbol of 'neo-colonial' injustice and victimhood, falsely I believe. The Israeli-Palestinian conflict is not about moral double-standards or anti-Semitism in my view. The global reaction we are witnessing is largely attributable to the unique and longstanding political aspects it engenders.  

I want to be clear. I don’t for a second believe that what Israel is doing in Gaza is genocide. If there is a genocide it’s being committed by Hamas, as they weaponize the Palestinian civilian population, using the lives of innocents as a tactic of war to demonize Israel. It’s diabolical, evil, and it’s working. People are not placing blame where it needs to go, on Hamas. And for any thinking person the tactic would signal how necessary defeating Hamas is, not just for Israel but also for the Palestinians. And yes there are mistakes that happen in war. Israel killed three hostages in a tragic mistake. But every possible effort must be made to respect certain moral boundaries when waging any conflict. We cannot accept that the ends always justify the means and ‘anything goes’.