Kissing Cousins - Moral Narcissists and the Humanitarian Racist

...What is also tragic is that these "intellects" cannot see that their blatant singling out of the sole Jewish state is an exercise in antisemitism, irrespective of how they try to justify the discrimination they practice, reckless and oblivious to the effect. As they are quick to tell the rest of us, only they care about humankind.

Israel Thrives..
by oldschooltwentysix..
12 January '14..

Recall the humanitarian racists, largely brought to attention by Manfred Gerstenfeld.

Humanitarian racists believe that non-white, oppressed people cannot be held to laws of humanity and requirements of the public conscience recognized in international law long ago. These "victims" are simply not advanced enough. As such, there must be a scapegoat to account for their actions because they cannot even be racist. Contemporary problems caused by the colonialism and imperialism of the Western developed world excuse the victims from any responsibility for their acts and allow humanitarian racists to look away as often as possible, even to the commission of major crimes.

Richard Cravatts is the creator and founding director of Boston University's Program in Publishing at BU's Center for Professional Education and current president of Scholars for Peace in the Middle East, an organization with over 40,000 academic members on more than 3200 campuses worldwide.

Cravatts references another breed, a cousin of the humanitarian racist, the moral narcissist. His recent essay, "Moral narcissism and the MLA’s obsession with Israel," is definitely worth reading.

Moral narcissism is based, not according to actual viability or justice of a cause, but on how moral narcissists feel about themselves by committing to a particular cause or movement. They live in self-approval bubbles where mutually agreed moral gestures and self congratulation constitutes a perfect and sufficient engagement with an imperfect world.

Cravatts refers to Jay Gaskill, a California lawyer who served as the Seventh Alameda County Public Defender from 1989 to 1999 who chose to devote more time to his writing projects.

Gaskill says that moral narcissists adopt a camouflage strategy to escape the moral disapproval of others by cloaking their narcissism in the trappings of ‘social justice positioning’.

These are members of “club narcissist” who live in an unspoken social compact, the first tenet of which is “We are not narcissists because we care”. The second tenet consists of a commitment to sign onto a shifting list of approved ‘humanitarian’ positions and stances with the unspoken understanding that these will require little more than gestures - bargain basement humanitarianism, of you will.

Thus the moral narcissists create an artificial a moral universe where ‘standing for’ is the equivalent of ‘doing for’.

***
Moral narcissists are easily controlled and manipulated by political elites, ideologues, and corrupt political predators. Moral narcissists are immune from the teaching effects of authentic dialogue. Moral narcissism is the disease of the modern mind.

Looking at moral narcissists in the context of anti-Israel activity, Cravatts says:

Gerstenfeld - Beware the humanitarian racist

Manfred Gerstenfeld..
Israel Opinion/Ynet..
23 January '12..


Among racists, the humanitarian ones hide their evil behavior best. This is why their racism often goes unnoticed so they can claim that they are level-headed and decent people.

Another type of racist, the "ugly" one, can be easily identified. He may, for instance, repeat the old colonialist statements claiming that Africans are like children, retarded or even subhuman. Such racists believe that people who cannot be held responsible for their acts should be treated as inferior.

The basic views of humanitarian racists are very similar to those of the ugly type. They may claim, for example, that most contemporary problems of African states result from the colonial period, even if these countries have been independent for many decades. This in fact means that Africans cannot be responsible for their actions. The humanitarian racist’s worldview is as distorted as that of the ugly racist. It is not stated explicitly, but only implicitly in his words.

The humanitarian racist’s conclusion differs, however, from that of the ugly racist. He or she considers that as the non-white or weak cannot be held responsible for their acts, one should look away as often as possible even if they commit major crimes. Ugly racists fortunately can no longer get articles published in mainstream media, but humanitarian racists unfortunately are welcomed by them.

Exposing humanitarian racists is neglected in the battle against the de-legitimization of Israel, although crucial. The success of the Palestinian narrative and its many lies in the Western world is, to a large extent, due to its continuous promotion by humanitarian racists. They present the Palestinians as victims only, referring as little as possible to the major crimes they perpetrate or support. In this way, the humanitarian racists have become supporters or allies of Palestinian terrorists, murder and genocide-promoters.

Ceren - Amnesty International’s Moral Equivalence

Omri Ceren
Commentary/Contentions
18 October '11

http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/10/18/amnesty-international-shalit/

Inasmuch as Amnesty International bans pro-Israel advocates from entering their meetings – the latest to be denied entry, just last night, was Zionist Federation Vice Chair Jonathan Hoffman – it’s easy to see how they could cocoon themselves into producing mindless anti-Israel propaganda. And given that the organization pointedly never called for Gilad Shalit’s release, it’s predictable they would do so in the context of Israel’s kidnapped and now released soldier.

But Amnesty’s statement on the Shalit trade, titled “Israel-Hamas prisoner swap casts harsh light on detention practices of all sides,” is a barrel-scraping embarrassment even by the organization’s notoriously low standards. The vast majority of the press release is handed over to criticizing Israeli detention policies, while a grand total of two paragraphs are spent condemning Shalit’s ordeal.

Shalit’s name does not even appear below the fifth paragraph of the 20-paragraph statement, while alleged Israeli human rights violations- relevant to the swap or not – are repeatedly noted. Israel is explicitly and twice accused of Geneva violations. By the end of the statement, Amnesty is even demanding freedom of movement between the Gaza Strip and the West Bank, which would be a boon to (among others) the Hamas terrorists they’re wringing their hands over.

Moral equivalence between Israel and Hamas has become a tired mainstay on the human rights left, and criticizing it sometimes becomes a paint-by-numbers exercise for those who differentiate between civilized countries and genocidal lunatics. But just for the record, Israel is a fully-functioning democracy with the legal right to arrest and imprison criminals. Palestinian terrorists, regardless of the fanatic splinter group from which they hail, are not uniformed soldiers, do not represent a state, and – Amnesty’s weird implication aside – are not entitled to Geneva protections.

Gordon - The Hypocrisy of “Humanitarian Activists”

Evelyn Gordon
Commentary/Contentins
14 September '11



http://www.commentarymagazine.com/2011/09/14/aid-flotilla-gaza-syria/#more-767909

It’s now been two months since the UN officially declared a famine in Somalia; last week, it said the famine had spread to a sixth region of the country, and without aid, as many as 750,000 people are facing “imminent” death. Strangely, there have been no reports of humanitarian aid flotillas mobilizing to answer the call. Yet just two months ago, 10 boats from all over the world mobilized to try to relieve the “humanitarian crisis” in Gaza, where the UN has never declared a famine or warned that anyone risks dying of hunger; indeed, on key measures of humanitarian wellbeing like life expectancy and infant mortality, Gazans surpass even some OECD countries, not to mention much of the developing world.

It’s also now been one week since Syria’s opposition begged human rights activists to come to the country to monitor the government’s attacks on civilians, and thereby hopefully deter them. In Syria, unlike in Gaza, soldiers slaughter civilians on a daily basis; this week, the UN estimated that some 2,600 Syrian civilians have been killed since March. During this same period, Israeli forces killed 72 Gazans, according to B’Tselem; of these, 28 were civilians. In short, Syria’s civilian death toll is almost 100 times higher. But there have been no reports of any humanitarian flotillas organizing to help Syria either.

If anyone needed proof that “humanitarian concerns” are not what motivate the Gaza flotillas, this ought to provide it. But it also attests to something else: the relative safety of the ventures in question.