Moral murder

YouTube channels dedicated to criminal investigations are enjoyable. The sophistication of the investigative tools and science behind forensic evidence are astounding. One case was particularly interesting, as it required the deployment of hundreds of officers, dozen detectives, thousands of volunteers, years of investigations, hundreds of thousands of dollars in administrative cost, and cross-national cooperation and deployments to uncover the murderer of one woman. The murder was found and tried to ensure that justice is observed and that society is safe. Such manpower and resources were a necessary expense to root out bad citizens that commit a capital crime that cannot, in any shape or form, be forgiven. 

But armies kill thousands in one go, and no one is alarmed. There is no public outcry or a YouTube channel that summarises 15 years of investigations to capture the murderers and exile them from the virtuous society. Soldiers are trusted to act responsibly when having the tools, power, and freehand to end lives the way they see appropriate. The determining factor here is the key word of: morality. 

A November 2024 article published by the British Journal of Politics and International Relations discussed the Moral Foundations Theory (MFT). This theory predicates that "ethical frameworks are a product of innate psychological systems which have evolved to help individuals navigate social life (Haidt and Joseph, 2004)". As such, despite vast differences across cultures, morality often has shared themes and similarities across populations, nested in the core of our intuitive ethics. 

Morality is understood to be the "code of conduct that, given specified conditions, would be put forward by all rational people". But rationality is also a relative notion, and is determined by subjective factors and ideological interpretations of the world. For instance, Israel's Minister of Finance, Bezalel Smotrich, wrote on X that "2025 would be the year of sovereignty in Judea and Samaria”. The choice of the Jewish biblical name of the West Bank reflects the rationale followed by the Israeli politician. Biblical scripts dictate that the region is for Jews, must be owned by Jews, run by Jews, and governed by Jews. As such, it is not only biblically imperative, but morally compulsory to return these lands to those they were assigned to, even if by force, and even if that means the moral killing for civilians. Death is allowed if the moral duty is the driver. Settlers killing Palestinians is also justified, and does not require the deployment of police forces for an in-depth investigation, because the act was a result of a moral duty: that of restoring biblical lands to Jews.

The life of the woman who was unlawfully murdered had much more value than the lives of thousands who perished following military acts. Her life, and death, merited an entire show....the others only a headline. Her killer was labelled a dangerous murderer, the others are hailed as heros. 

The argument to make here is that whilst we tend to believe that we have a Moral Foundations Theory that glues humanity into one big basic system of beliefs based on shared morals, humans actually use morality to justify every immoral act, including murder. As long as society sees it as moral, then go ahead and kill. 

What a coincidence!

 

 "In politics, nothing happens by accident. If it happens, you can bet it was planned that way." Franklin D. Roosevelt

Coincidence, serendipity, and seriality - as described by the coincidence collector Paul Kammerer - do not explain politics. Nor do they explain the media.

Several articles were published regarding an earthquake that hit Iran on October 5 and theories as to whether that was actually a nuclear test run by Iran. An earthquake, measuring 4.4 on the Richter scale, was recorded in Aradan County in Semnan Province. The timing of the seismic activity and the location "made people link it to Iran's nuclear programme and ask if the Islamic country was close to getting its own nuclear weapon" as per media articles. Although earthquakes are normal in that geographical area, the timing of the natural phenomena was put at doubt by a skeptic, conspiratorial,  and weary media coverage.

CIA Director William Burns said yesterday that there was no evidence that Iran has decided to build a nuclear weapon. However, he also said that Iran only needs one week to amass enough highly enriched uranium to make a nuclear bomb. The nuclear threat  - coupled with the ideological one - that Iran poses in the region is not news. Although the US is treading carefully and Israel following suit, as far as the nuclear issue is concerned, both governments will start crying wolf soon. 

At a time when the US is calling for ceasefire and containing escalations, it does not want to further implicate itself or Israel in the destruction of the region. Instead, and similar to what happened in Iraq over 20 years ago, the fears that were unsubstantiated will suddenly become merited owing to cleverly and patiently weaved messaging in international media outlets. Iran is supporting all of its proxies in the region and is adamant to press through a programme that has been questioned from the outset. An act against the regime is not only justified, but necessary. It is a question of time before it is fully embraced.

Israel's former premier is calling for striking Iran's nuclear sites. He sees the opportunity as ideal, as one more aggression against a nuclear fanatic land would be dwarfed against the atrocities committed in the region. The current Israeli most likely agrees behind closed doors, and a US government  - whichever one is elected - will also probably agree.  It is the role of the media to make us agree, and forget that coincidences in politics do not happen.

Post-truth politics

 

Since October 7, 2023, epistemicide by the media and online influencers has been on the rise. Epistemicide, which is the systematic destruction of rival forms of knowledge, is evident. The mass-murder of Gazans, and the destruction of their livelihoods, schools, communities, universities, heath centers, and cultural and religious centers all contribute to the death of Gazans as spokespeople and knowledge producers of their own history and being. Coupled with radical, misinformed social media influencers, attempting to both justify the Israeli aggression and negating any Gazan narrative, the process is gradual, but guaranteed. The process of denying existence as a nation, as a people, as a community with a distinguished and proper culture and history, and right to exist. It is a process that aims to eradicate the concept of non-citizen, as Gazans have been since 1948, where, in Tendayi Bloom’s words, the absence of citizenship and the livelihood of people despite the system are also being denied.

But the tragedy does not stop here. In comes post-truth politics, which in itself fuels false narratives and feeds public anxiety, distrust and suspicion. Most importantly, post-truth politics has become wishful, non-factual narrative. 

In the Trump-Harris debate held on September 10, 2024, the presidential candidates were asked about their policies towards resolving the Israel-Gaza conflict. And here, each candidate played the term rhetoric to the beat. 

Trump’s answer was a fictional, back-to-the-future, and painfully predictable “this would not have happened under my watch”. A non-answer that gaslights spectators and tricks them into believing that the suffering, injustice, and dehumanization of Gazans would not have led to any new forms of resistance (irrespective of its effectiveness or soundness). Had he been president, Gazans and Israelis would have held hands and rejoiced their neighborly ties under the Mediterranean rainbow. Such inflated ego that embarrassingly allows its bearer to believe that an audience would be reassured that a genocide would end if he were allowed to travel back in time, is sadly not shocking today.

Then came in Harris with another post-truth political maneuver. Harris insisted on a cease-fire agreement and a two state solution. She either lacked the courage or the brains to realize that Israel decided no, and voted no, on both issues. Claiming that her approach to end the conflict is by inking a deal to stop all aggression and establishing a Palestinian state is also gas-lighting an American public. It is time for hard truths, for finger pointing, for brutal honesty.

At present, Palestinians seem to be locked in between a media army that manipulates ignorant and biased actors to spread half-truths and deny truths, and politicians who are delusional and drowning in rhetoric that anything they say is completely void of meaning, inspiration, or goal. Whilst this is happening, a literal army is eradicating an entire body of culture, and uprooting its people in every possible mean.

Epistemicide is happening, and we are watching. And some are clapping. But Gazans are not, and will not, be erased.