Unresolved Plight of the Palestinians
There are different groups that have been inexistence in Israel since time immemorial. But the most prominent ones are the Israelites and Palestinians. These groups have been working on under the motivational principle that has been applied in the course of generating an understanding of the concept of conservatism. It is very elementary to say that in the democratic and liberal forms of government, the sovereign power resides in the people. But under the principle that has been controlling the groups men are only equal in so far as laws and their groups are concerned.
Aside from it, there is no equality. By this, it only means that they are protected only as far as laws and god is concerned (Rossiter, 2006). Noting this kind of principle is the apparent absence of equality in terms of the social, political and even economic aspects of human being. In terms of the social aspect, it can be seen that Israelites are distinct from the Palestinians. There is a status quo that should be adhered upon especially when treating the groups. They are not equal under the social order of the society.
Israelites are considered higher in terms of intelligence, capabilities and social status. Body Against the revolutions that are significant of modernity, there was the prophetic stream of Marxism. With increasing steps towards rationalism, much went against it because rationalism was very hard to hold. With increasing fury people turned increasingly against such rationalism. This will be explained in the essay as rebellion will be explained in terms of a greater pull against rationalism so far as it interfered with progressions towards legitimacy.
As Marx writes in The Gundrisse: `In this society of free competition, the individual appears detached from the natural bonds etc, in which earlier historical periods make him the accessory of a definite and limited human conglomerate` (Marx, 1978, p. 221). There is in modern strife a religious impulse towards rebellion under such limiting conditions. This religious impulse was carried by romanticist thinkers like Matthew Arnold in that they saw the technocratic apparatuses of a modern rational society destroying something of the spectacular miracle of religion.
That the removal of religion was something tragic and in due course something many people could not endure that very well. This was a tendency that suffocated many people because they could not stand it. In the rebellion of the Palestinians, much was costly because prices were impacted and reasoning was skewed. Yet there were legitimate actions taken by the mighty Israeli state to block all such efforts towards revolutionary agitation and attempts to ward of a modernity of extreme rationality.
From its beginnings, the Palestinian state has been a state caught in the webs of dependency. Caught without an adequate bureaucracy and system of administration, dependency on Israel was pre-eminent and in many ways, and it still is. The quasi-state instituted in 1994 was one with dubious stability due to dubiously stable networks of monetary transference. As Mushtaq, Husain Khan notes, a€? Its economic survival therefore depended on transfers from Israel of taxes collected from Palestinians and on aid from donors (Khan, 2004, p. 13).
The movements of goods and people to the outside world and even within its own territories had to go through multiple Israeli controlled checkpoints that could be opened or closed depending on the satisfactory performance of the PNA from the Israeli perspective of delivering security`(Khan, 2004, p. 13). Though this deliverance of security may have been a deep desire, the manageability of this deliverance was simply unavailable and the taxes for this security simply not enough and never enough. This may be partially due to the unfortunate trend that security is managed by the infliction of terror.
When Stalin reached, the ability to manage security he did it in such a wave of crimson and brutality that such security was unfeasible in itself unless horrible combinations were acclimated to the population (Parrish, 1996). What Stalin achieved was the greatest security for such a long time but the terror directed at his own people was so grave that words cannot speak of their error. From secret police to a violence that was so awful and so brutal that guns were alarming to people and knives silenced all too many from strife.
On this note, perhaps the Palestinian exertion of rebellion was to prevent the state from conforming exactly to brutal standards of regimentation, regulation, and extreme, rationalization. When there was not enough money given to Palestine there was even more trouble and even greater challenges. As Palestinians economy was weak and its trade underdeveloped, only terror could impose a kind of peace the Israelis wanted. As legitimated as it may be, this terror must be in some clear way a signal that something is going very wrong in Palestine.
That domestication was certainly needed but that perhaps internal crime was suffocated so extremely that extreme perversions of outward expression appeared. To the harm and greater endangering of the Israeli state, it was very ironic. It must be understood that the State should promote a just and dynamic social order. This is accomplished through policies that provide adequate social services. Every society must ensure the prosperity and independence of the nation and free the people from poverty. Hence, it means all people not just the aristocratic few.
The goal is to reduce the political and economic power of the privileged few by equalizing widely differing standards and opportunities for advancement and to raise the masses of the people from their poverty to a qualitative life worthy of human dignity. With the eradication of mass poverty being experienced of a nation, the State solves at the same time a chain of social problems that comes with it; social unrest, breakdown of family systems, diseases, ignorance, criminality, and low productivity.
Policies must only be created to promote social justice in all phases of national development. In the fulfillment of this duty, the State must give preferential attention to the welfare of the less fortunate members of the community—the poor, the underprivileged and those who have less in life for the benefit of the whole nation. In much of the history, great states have been constructed not from the absolute to the opposition but rather from the opposition to the absolute.
Towards transformation, cleavages are often times useful, and separated by the social; the necessity of difference and strife itself is too often obscured. Many intellectuals such as Kay Warren (1993, p18) wrote that which serves to `expose the distortions of top-down formulations of culture and change that concentrate on the powers of the state, formal institutions, and national leaders, projecting passivity and ignorance onto the wider public`. That which serves to expose does not eradicate legitimacy but only pulls greater pressures for a more authentic legitimacy.
A state as that which J. P. Nettle puts it, `retains a skeletal, ghostly existence largely because, for all the changes in emphasis and interest of research, the thing exists and no amount of conceptual restructuring can dissolve it` (Nettl, 1968, p. 559-592). Is a fact as it is a spirit lodged in many vacuums and social spaces. As an `antithesis of subjective and objective` in the Hegelian sense, this spirit is that which animates systems and conceptual structures no matter what it may be called or how it may be otherwise conceptualized and framed (Schwendinger, 1975, p.
47). The true spirit may be piped in uncertain sounds and yet people do hear and even sound the cries for battle and proclamation. Their resentment in the principles of liberalism cannot be doubted. There is neither recommendation for nationalism, liberalization nor revolution all together. Such principles are just mere presumptions of those who are against the conservative governance of government. As embodied in the practices of the groups, the functions of conservatism is determined to entail the ensuring of the equilibrium and balance in the society.
But it was the greatest fear, however, that such balance will be destroyed in line of the different things that are being discovered in the society (Malanga, 2005). For example, the development of printing press and its invention will somehow pave the way for people to revolt accordingly. It could be utilized to destroy the essence of conservatism. It could be utilized to spread wrong motivational dialogues and scripts that will enable revolution and establish wrong beliefs and false ideas that are detrimental to the government and of the whole society as well (Alinsky, 1989).
The success of communism, that over a third of the worlds population `lives under communist governments` is an indication that within the spirit is the allowance and disposition towards diversity and is attuned towards change rather than regression (Smith, 1987, pp. 244). As communism is a militant ideology, it is yet at its core a pacifist strategy. It is only in its core of pacifism that such ability is made towards legitimacy and the harnessing of vital energies towards greater and even more global ends.
The ideological formation of people so that they accept legitimacy and accept that the spirit of the state can persevere above corruption is a sounding signal towards reducing strife in eventuality even when signs of strife are in many ways much and more present. With apostles and spirituality, the militant spirit of communism is yet exonerated with fewer graves and more adaptable circumstances towards greater glory and authentic perseverance. Towards greater goals and more, inward hesitance.
For human integrity, integral thinking has much appeal but for integral thinking, one must play with contradictions and do judgment justice. As legitimacy is neither black nor white, there is an innate desire to unveil and yet a confounded desire to leave obscured as one realizes in the absolutely legitimate state something that is beyond callous meddling or even intrepid exterior terrorism. That if the spirit is there, the matter indeed will hold. Whatever may be thrown against communism, however savage it may originally seem.
There is yet a spirit towards perpetual endurance and an ability to intercede in matters of greater cause. As yet perfect social control has never been secured although the absolute spirit may always be retained. Legitimacy as a concept holds in endurance through the trepidations of the moment and the agonies of withheld time. As Israel may deal with Palestine as a tragically disrupted state, there is indeed such an imbalance in power that what should be embarrassing is only cast out as further shame for Palestinians.
What may be pragmatic against a situation is somewhat skewed if categories are misapplied. When Palestine is so weak and Israel, backed by hawks in America, is so strong, is a slight outrage in its tragic proportions and a bit comical if carnage is to be exploited. As Robert Silverberg writes: `Men and nations normally turn away from historical or depth factors in their dealings with international problems. Power and strategic position are the effective determinants of decision. Long before the label `pragmatic` was given to it, this was the stance of the Machiavellia€™s of all ages.
Thucydides baldly recorded it twenty-five centuries ago in the address of the Athenians to the people of Melos: `You know as well as we do that right, as the world goes, is only in question between equals in power, while the strong do what they can and the weak suffer what they must` (Silverberg 1970, p. ix). If Palestinians are compounding such losses, clearly, there are issues of greater weakness on the part of the Palestinians and that the paper tigers are more the Palestinians who are weak and suffering in matter but not in spirit.
When Israel is abusing the Palestinians and coercing so much that any true intervention or any purposeful expansion is simply impossible as much as it is implausible. Yet as Israel is positioned and terrorism by Palestinians is not positioned, it is not a fair fight. Facing such attacks of a guerilla nature, Israel is clumsily trying to uphold some sense of order as its spirit is being strangled and by nature, conveniently attacked. Against such terrorist threats, first suffered by the Israelis, many countries have formed in alliance and this alliance is based upon knowledge that if such violence continues under such endangering demands.
Containment simply cannot hold. To intervene NATO continues to undertake peacekeeping missions and these missions are clearly not successful against the intervention of terrorism so are the wrong battles being forged and bitterly fought? (Moens, 2003, xix) Indeed they may be. Modern Islamic fundamental states are in some aspect truer in nature to legitimacy than they are to state-hood(Moussalli, 2003). Yet they are being so misconstrued by Christian notions, which do not allow for further progressions of form rather than matter to take place. Islam allows for Jesus but Christianity does not allow for Islam.
As spiritual affirmations collectively entail greater thinking from human beings as creatures, which love wisdom and deep thought. It could be that Islamic Fundamental states in adherence with religious commandments are more in alignment with what weakened people want even if they may be seen as monstrous or demonic aberrations or rather, as evil. To conclude, if Christianity was a religion born with walls then in origin it had to have been born from the freedom of the rolling countryside. `Siege warfare played a comparatively small part in early Islamic military activity.
In general it seems that Muslim armies did not like to find themselves confined within walls but would rather have had the freedom of manoeuvre in the open countryside`(Kennedy, 2001, p. 183). It is perhaps the fundamental inability of the Islamic people to accept the wall that the modern conception of state-hood simply cannot hold. \ Yet the spirit clearly is there, otherwise, why would people be strapping on bombs to their chests and hurling themselves against the sacred wall of statehood? Under such material limitations, it may be the best that the spirit of many Islamic people can do.
As barbaric as it may seem to more developed fortifications, it may be the fortification itself that is more barbaric and corrupting than infidels, which threaten to rampage and destroy its walls. As John Esposito acknowledges, the reformation of Islam to monitor itself against modern conditions of advanced capitalism and its revolutionary refuge may be a lesser threat than it is so perceived (Esposito, 1992). Perhaps the clash of `politicized perceptions` can end if greater scrutiny is engaged and pacifist tendencies are engaged in with a greater urgency towards actual understanding.
Possibly the misapplication and appropriation of categories can end if only to disengage from habits with are tortuous to people who do not believe in walls and fortifications and have died by their corruption (Hafez, 2000). That in such a liberal economy, governments that manage to contain threats within a reasonable limit is enough. Conclusion Despite the different trajectories that have impacted the lives of the nation and the people inhabiting the place there is still a big difference between the groups.
Ironically, it can be said that whatever the advocates of conservatism have fought for in their lifetimes it has all been gone because of the fact that changes have constantly brought liberalism to the nation. Politically speaking, the groups have indeed maintained its conservatism even in the aftermath of the war.
Alinsky, S. (1989). Rules for Radicals. Boston: Vintage. Malanga, S. (2005). The New New Left: How American Politics Works Today. New York: Ivan R. Dee. Rossiter, L. (2006). The Liberal Mind: The Psychological Causes of Political Madness. New York: Free World Books, LLC.Sample Essay of AssignmentExpert.com