Rare Israeli ruling against practice of demolishing homes of Palestinians accused of violence

[conuly]

This ruling seems pretty self-evident to me.

But the ruling against “punitive demolition” sparked outrage among conservative Israeli politicians at a time when control of judicial appointments is at the heart of frictions within Israel’s fractious coalition government. Protesters gathered Saturday outside the Tel Aviv home of Supreme Court President Ester Hayut to condemn “judicial dictatorship.”

Naturally.

You know, in a way I'm almost relieved to read this paragraph and realize that this particular flavor of bullshit is not wholly limited to the American right wing.

“Demolishing the house is not a punishment according to the law. It’s an act of deterrence,” said Eran Ben-Ari, legal adviser of a right-wing advocacy group for settlers and victims of terrorist attacks. “Both soldiers and citizens could be killed in the next terrorist activity that won’t be deterred because of this verdict.”

If it hasn't worked for the past however-many years you've been doing this, maybe it's time to try something new. I'm just saying.

Comments

[wendelah1]

Yeah. People are people, the world over.

[conuly]

But why do people suck!?

[wendelah1]

We evolved in a very different environment than the one we live in now? The very traits that are causing us as a species to befoul the earth and act in bewilderingly destructive ways toward our fellow humans were once adaptive?

In my darkest moments, I think the best thing that could happen to our planet would be an extinction event, but one that affects only people. Give the planet back to nature.

[nodrog]

No need to go so far as extinction - merely roll back to the world population that existed any time before AD 1900.  We and the planet got on just fine when there were at most only a billion of us or so, all told.

[mama_kestrel]

And maybe, just maybe, demolishing homes is actually the trigger for more violence? I wish I remember who said "an eye for an eye and a tooth for a tooth leaves everyone blind and toothless." Just saying.

[conuly]

It's attributed to Gandhi, but I don't know for sure if he's the one who said it.

[conuly]

And it looks like I was right to doubt that attribution!

https://quoteinvestigator.com/2010/12/27/eye-for-eye-blind/

[dewline]

But what do you do when you're faced with people bound and determined to make us all blind and toothless?

[dewline]

Oh no. Hell no. The Will to Cruelty is not and has never been restricted to the American right wing. It is a universal flaw, common to all human nations, recognized as such and not.

[conuly]

It's the specificity of declaring that judicial decisions that affirm other people's basic human rights are "tyranny".

[conuly]

(or dictatorship)

[dewline]

Noting that detail as well for continuing attention...

[sabotabby]

The Israeli government is basically a client of the American government and shares all their venal and corrupt tendencies, with a bonus that they say the quiet part of ethnonationalism out loud. Admittedly their parliamentary structure is a bit more sensibly organized, but that's about the only good thing that can be said for it.

[low_delta]

“Demolishing the house is not a punishment according to the law. It’s an act of deterrence,”

Um... that's exactly what punishment is - deterrent. The harsher we make the punishment, the less likely people are to do that thing. I suppose some component of punishment is revenge, but all the legal reasons point to deterrent.

[nodrog]

Wrong phrasing.  It is not a sentence imposed by a court of law for a guilty verdict - it is extrajudicial terrorism, literally and deliberately, and works as “deterrent” no better than it would against Israel, were the shoe on the other foot - indeed, it likewise only makes more trouble.  Oft times Israel is their own worst enemy.

[nodrog]

That's fine - I have nothing more to say on the subject.

[conuly]

Note: I'm not convinced that this policy does work to deter anybody.

[low_delta]

I agree.

[silveradept]

Ah, yes, "activist judges" is a thing for conservatives everywhere. They tend to be afraid that judges might be with the times, instead of insisting that we can't possibly move forward in any way because that would mean respecting people as people, instead of using them as scapegoats and targets.

[conuly]

It's a shitty attitude but, again, a relief to know that it infests the discourse elsewhere.