I was just reading about how a current Israeli war minister’s son died in combat and it made me wonder that if Israeli’s politicians who make these decisions know their family will be affected by it personally and directly, does that lend towards the suggestion that it is more likely they are making genuinely ethically and morally correct decisions to engage in war stuff given their personal skin i the game?
It would seem totally different from American politicians like Cheney who create bullshit geopolitical conflicts knowing full well their progeny will never be touched by it…
Edit: I’m assuming they actually care/give a shit about their offspring and family, even if only just for appearences
If your main question is if it leads to more morally correct decisions, then that would be a very hard no.
Most people do believe they are doing the right thing. The Americans are, the Russians are and the Chinese are. They DO believe what they do is correct. Same with religion.
But does that make any of the above groups more correct than the other? The answer is: No, it’s their actions that shows that.
My point is, Israel will always think what they do is morally correct, no matter if it is or not. And when you act in that belief, you can justify almost anything in the world. Because you really think it’s the right thing to do.
Sounds like what you are trying to articulate is the idea of ethical relativism.
Descriptive moral relativism holds only that people do, in fact, disagree fundamentally about what is moral, with no judgment being expressed on the desirability of this.
Mabe morally correct isn’t quite the right notion. Maybe I was more getting at good faith plus worth the potential loss of a beloved member of their family for yhe greater good.
Its very easy to make abstract bloody decisions and send strangers children to war if it never hits close to home so I was playing with that notion as a nexus to getting a better understanding of why Israel would engage in Hydra-busting (West Bank expansion etc) if they were on the hook (in terms of their offsprings lives) for the collateral damage likely to result from such controversial and perilous efforts
The assumption that direct familial involvement would make people more peaceful or make them take more ethical decisions is flat out incorrect. If anything it will make them more ruthless and dehumanizing against the “other” and seek even faster ways of total annihilation rather than difficult nuanced and diplomatic peaceful solutions. The military mindset is a very rigid one, with only rights and wrongs, blind obedience, the only nuance allowed is tactical nuance, the only complexity allowed is logistic complexity. Morally and ethically it’s always down to I’d rather the other die than me. The IDF once traded 1000 prisoners for 1 IDF soldier, what makes you think they will not kill 10000 children if it means it saves 1 soldier?
The IDF once traded 1000 prisoners for 1 IDF soldier, what makes you think they will not kill 10000 children if it means it saves 1 soldier?
Because… the moral considerations in both cases are completely different…? How is this even a question?
That’s like saying “He once bought a car for $50,000, what makes you think he won’t steal $500,000 if it meant getting a Tesla?”
Edit: I’m assuming they actually care/give a shit about their offspring and family, even if only just for appearences
one of the more quietly racist things I’ve read lately, congrats
There is only a racial implication if you look deep into it or your brain is wired to see everything as racist.
Or maybe if you see racism everywhere, you’re the problem.
A big part of the problem that the average person has in relation to race is that they constantly need to be aware of it as to not offend someone who looks to deep into it, and usually isn’t even part of the race that’s supposedly offended.
This constant awareness tends of lead to people forming actual opinions about race.
If your opinion is that jews should not be criticized because they happen to be jews, and you say that as a deflection from the actual argument, you now created someone who has more dislike towards jews because their race is used as a shield from criticism.
And just to clarify, both perspective are stupid, but if you look at how right wing racists think, this is a big part of it.
That’s a great insight into Israeli society.
The answer to your question is a resounding “yes”.
In fact, among the 4 members of war cabinet, at least one other has children in active combat units, and ALL cabinet members served in a combat unit as well as had at least one child in active combat duty.
Most children of Israeli politicians are absolutely conscripted to the army, and the public would look very badly on a “fortunate son” type situation.
Furthermore, there’s an unwritten rule the ultra-orthodox parties do not involve themselves or even voice an opinion on military matters because, and this something often said in Israel, “they don’t risk their children’s life in the army” (the ultra-orthodox are essentially exempt from conscription).
The Israeli Jewish public doesn’t see the Israeli combatants as poor or uneducated “others”, but as their children, brothers and fathers.
I think that’s a more ethical way of looking at it. However, this also helps explain the seeming lack of consideration for Palestinian life. Take a random person and ask him to choose between risking the life of his kid, who is in active service, in a military operation or throwing bombs and risking harming other civilians. Most people will choose to risk others. And among those who’ll choose to risk their kid, most would either be lying or didn’t really think about the question.
Furthermore, there’s an unwritten rule the ultra-orthodox parties do not involve themselves or even voice an opinion on military matters
Only this isn’t true Deri (of Shas and convicted felon) is in the war cabinet for crying out loud.
You are really naive if you think they don’t get a say in everything that goes on, and deliberately ignoring reality if you can’t admit that there diversion of funds for their own causes and communities has deprived the rest of the country not only of the security it needed on 7.10, but of health and social and community funding for everyone else, for decades.
The amount of power the ultra orthodox hold is obscene.
Also, he’s barred from being a minister as per Israeli’s supreme court ruling (exactly because he’s been convicted with fraud multiple times), so I highly doubt he could be appointed to the war cabinet even in theory.
One could argue that the ultra orthodox parties are active behind the scenes, but there’s no indication of that anywhere. Israel has free press, so this type of thing would probably come out as rumors at the very least (By contrast, there were reports he was the de-facto minister of social services after the supreme court ruling).
Not to diminish the political power they hold, but in this specific case there isn’t any indication they exert said power.
Everybody is mandatory drafted in Israel except ultra orthodox jews and arabs. Being a politician’s family isn’t on that list. And also its very common. All politicians at some point either serve or served at the army, including their children. It just so happened that someone who died is also the son of the one who calls the shots about the war.
Mandatory service doesn’t mean they don’t get cushy jobs (if they want them) though.
Yair Netanyahu was never going anywhere near the front lines (he was in the Spokesperson’s Unit), and nor do many other children-of (not only politicians of course, but they do have a lot of influence), they get jobs at headquarters or some other nice safe place, the military bands/entertainment units are notoriously where many a nepo-baby has got their start…
