The Israel-Bashing Mediacracy

e-mail | august 2002 | By Prof. Paul Eidelberg

[dennisw]

 

The Israel-Bashing Mediacracy
By Prof. Paul Eidelberg

 By the “mediacracy” I mean those journalists that dominate the print and
electronic media. They consist of Libertarians, Internationalists,
Egalitarians, and Relativists.  I shall refer to them by the acronym
LIERs.

 Israel-bashing is the favorite pastime of these LIERs.  It reached
grotesque proportions when Israel attacked the PLO in Lebanon in 1982:
Israel was accused of genocide.  The same accusation was hurled at
Israel when it attacked the PLO’s human bomb factory in Jenin:  52
Arabs, mostly terrorists, were killed.  What lies behind this media
bias, obscenely manifested by CNN and the BBC?

 Some say various reporters are in the pay of Arabs.  This may have been
true of the Beirut press corps during the Lebanese war.  But even if
some journalists covering the Israel-PLO conflict are on the take, this
will not account for all the venom spewed by LIERs against the Jewish
state.

 Some attribute the mediacracy’s bias to anti-Semitism.  There is truth
to this contention, but it is superficially understood.  I’ll come back
to it later.

Still others ascribe Israel-bashing to the LIERs’ underdog mentality.
The Arabs have indeed succeeded in portraying themselves as the David
against the Israel Goliath.  That they use women and children as human
shields does not alter the pro-Arab bias of the mediacracy.  Nor does
Arab butchery of Jewish civilians in malls and wedding halls.   Civilian
casualties inflame the mediacracy only when the civilians are Arabs. 

 But here I must ask:  Why is the life of a civilian worth more than the
life of a soldier?  Does not a soldier have loved ones: parents, a wife,
children?  Moreover, isn’t it true that 68% of the Arabs called
“Palestinians” approve of homocide bombers, and that virtually all of
these “civilians” are dedicated to Israel’s extermination?  Don’t they
aid and abet Arab Jew-killers?

 Those who harbor Arab terrorists or do not flee from them are fully
responsible for the consequences of Israel's attacks on such villains.
The nonsense about “collateral damage” is tantamount to the negation of
might in defense of right.  The life of no Jewish soldier should be
placed in harms way to spare any Arab “civilian.”  Intimidated, however,
by the mediacracy, the Sharon government has sacrificed Jews—recall
Jenin--to save Arabs.  By so doing this government is criminally
responsible for the death of Jewish soldiers. 

 Here I recall Julian Benda’s book the Treason of the Intellectuals,
written between the two World Wars.  Benda discerned the decadence of
European intellectuals and pacifists for whom justice becomes suspect
when backed by force. This pretty much describes the libertarians,
internationalists, egalitarians, and relativists that now dominate the
media and, to no small extent, Israel’s political and military elites. 

 Precisely because these elites want to appear humane, the LIERs of the
media portray Israel as inhumane.  They falsely depict Jews as
“occupiers” of Arab land.  They portray the Arabs as a “people” – the
“Palestinians” --  struggling for political freedom and statehood.  They
obscure the fact that it was the “Palestinians” that destroyed Lebanon’s
free Christian community.  But we have yet to get to the heart of the
matter: why the mediacracy must be biased against Israel.

 Because of its libertarianism, the mediacracy advocates absolute freedom
of speech and press. The mediacracy has a vested interest in opposing
all forms of restraint on this freedom, whether legal or moral.  As a
case in point, the New York Times editorialized about closing down the
PLO office in New York as a violation of freedom of speech, even though
the PLO is committed to the destruction of the only country in the
Middle East that enjoys freedom of speech.

 This built-in bias of the mediacracy against any restraint on freedom of
expression makes it hostile to government authority, indeed, to
authority per se.  This is one reason why the mediacracy has sided with
insurrectionary Arabs vis-a-vis the State of Israel.  Another is this.
Unlike the mediacracy, which boasts of its internationalism, the Jewish
state exemplifies nationalism or particularism.  We are approaching the
heart of the matter.

 Notwithstanding its particularism, Judaism gave mankind the
universalistic ethics of the Ten Commandments.  This ethics, taken as a
whole, goes against the moral relativism and libertarianism that
permeate the mediacracy.  (It was ABC anchorman Peter Jennings who once
said, “There is no truth, only news.”)  

 Despite the secularism of Israel’s ruling elites, the name “Israel”
conveys to the mediacracy, consciously or otherwise, the religious idea
of a Godly nation governed by absolute truths.  This cannot but rankle
advocates of unfettered freedom of expression for whom truth is
relative.  Opposed to all forms of restraint or authority, the
mediacracy must be biased against the one nation whose name signifies
the ultimate source of all rightful authority -- God.

 

[dennisw]

This article came from:
FREEMAN CENTER FOR STRATEGIC STUDIES
P.O. Box 35661 * Houston, Texas 77235-5661
Phone or Fax: 713-723-6016 * E-mail: freemanlist@aol.com
OUR WEB SITE (URL): http://www.freeman.org
Read THE MACCABEAN ONLINE: URL:http://www.freeman.org/online.htm
====================================
FREEMAN CENTER BROADCAST - August 21, 2002
These broadcasts are a public service of the Freeman Center. If you do not
wish to receive them, please call our office to have your name removed from
our Fax/Email list.
==========================
YOU ARE INVITED TO JOIN THE FREEMAN E-MAIL LIST

Freeman Center List Name:   freemanlist
Owners E-mail Address: freemanlist@aol.com
To Subscribe: Please send a message to: majordomo@lists.io.com
Message:    SUBSCRIBE  freemanlist
To Unsubscribe: Please send a message to:  majordomo@lists.io.com
Message:    UNSUBSCRIBE  freemanlist
=======================
YOU ARE INVITED TO JOIN THE FREEMANLIST DIGEST
To subscribe to the digest version of the list, which sends one big email
every day or two with all the broadcasts for that period, send a message to:
majordomo@lists.io.com
Message: SUBSCRIBE freemanlist-digest
To Unsubscribe: Please send a message to: majordomo@lists.io.com
Message: UNSUBSCRIBE freemanlist-digest
============================================

[dennisw]

If you want on or off me Israel/MidEast/Islamic Jihad ping list please let me know.  Via Freepmail is best way.............

[Kermit]

"By the “mediacracy” I mean those journalists that dominate the print and electronic media. They consist of Libertarians, Internationalists, Egalitarians, and Relativists."

Wow, LIBERTARIANS dominate the print and electronic media. Prof. Eidelberg must've gotten us confused with LIBERALS. He'd be able to keep his acronym and improve his accuracy and credibility at the same time, if he'd make that change. I stopped reading at this blooper.

[LostTribe]

> Judaism gave mankind the universalistic ethics of the Ten Commandments.

Afraid the author has some problems with basic history. There was no Judaism without Jews, and there were no Jews at the time of Moses. Just millions of Israelites. The offspring of several of those Israelite tribes did become known as Jews many hundreds of years and dozens of generations later, but the vast majority of those Israelites who received the 10 Commandments from Moses went on to become known as Celts.

[The Electrician]

Yes, the author seemingly doesn't have a clue about Libertarians (with either a capital 'L' or a small one)...

[Stirner]

I think that the concept he was trying for was neither 'libertarians' nor 'liberals', but rather 'libertines', those whose sole value is indulging in pleasures without consideration of consequences for themselves or anyone else.

[LostTribe]

> Judaism gave mankind the universalistic ethics of the Ten Commandments.

...However, if the author is suggesting that Judaism was the carrier through history (via the Torah) of the 10 Commandments given to ALL the Israelites (as contrasted with actually GIVING the commandments), he has a point.

[js1138]

but the vast majority of those Israelites who received the 10 Commandments from Moses went on to become known as Celts.

Trolling today?

[LostTribe]

>Trolling today?

Anywhere historic inaccuracy is found is fair fishing ground. Are you trying to get into the licensing business? {ggg}.

[Valin]

Still others ascribe Israel-bashing to the LIERs’ underdog mentality.

This strikes me as true.
I recall reading before the 67 war, Israel was portrayed as these plucky little jews making the desert bloom inspite of overwelming odds.
After the 67 war I started to see a change in the coverage to a more pro-Palestinian slant. The poor Palestinians battleing against overwelming odds and a massive Israeli occupation trying to carve out a nation for themselves.

I'm reminded of the speech the Nixon gave after he lost the race for gov. of Calf., telling the press that they should assign "one poor little reporter" to write the facts of a campaign.

[Valin]

but the vast majority of those Israelites who received the 10 Commandments from Moses went on to become known as Celts.
And do I detect a hint of anglo-israelist nonsense?



Two new groups of people emerge in Central Europe during the late Neolithic (New Stone Age) period, one certainly immigrant. Each group may be distinguished archaeologically by characteristic artifacts found in their respective burial sites. One was a Bell Beaker or drinking vessel. We now refer to this group as the Beaker folk. There is still some doubt as to the origins of the Beaker folk, some say Iberia, and some say Central Europe itself. Never-the-less it is believed that they emerge as an independent cultural group around 3000 B.C.E..

The second group is characterized by a perforated battle-axe of stone. Similarly, we now refer to this group as the Battle-Axe folk. Evidence points towards origins in the steppe-lands of southern Russia, between the Caucasus and the Carpathian mountains. The Battle-Axe folk may be attributed with the initial spread of the Indo-European group of languages. (see diagram) The Indo-European group of languages encompasses most of those current in present-day Europe. In Central Europe the Beaker folk and Battle-Axe folk fused to become one European people. Shortly thereafter began the Bronze Age in Europe. It is unclear whether the arrival of the two groups influenced the arrival of the Bronze Age or not. Many think that contact with the Mediterranean and beyond may have influenced this.

From this period onwards the line of continuity which leads directly to the historic Celts may be traced from the archaeological evidence. This is identified by the successive Únêtice, Tumulus and Urnfield cultures of the Central European Bronze Age. The Únêtice culture appears to have emerged from the fusion of Battle-Axe and Beaker peoples and their immediate descendants. The Únêtice culture became the pre-eminent culture in Central Europe by the middle of the second millennium B.C.E.. Because of rich mineral deposits and control of trade routes between the south-east (early Mediterranean cultures) and the more distant parts of Europe, the Únêtice people prospered.

The Tumulus culture which followed the Únêtice, and from which they descended, dominated Central Europe during much of the second part of the second millenium B.C.E.. As the name implies, the Tumulus culture is distinguished by the practice of burying the dead beneath burial mounds. During this period trade contacts with the south-east remained intact and were probably expanded. The Tumulus culture flourished without any disruption of local peoples by large-scale immigration. This was to end, however, toward the close of the second millennium B.C.E., when there is evidence of wide-spread disruption which affected the "higher civilizations" to the south-east and curbed trade.

With the emergence of the Urnfield culture of Central Europe, there appear a people whom some scholars regard as being 'proto-Celtic', in that they may have spoken an early form of Celtic. As the name suggests, the people of the Urnfield culture cremated their dead and placed the remains in urns which were buried in flat cemeteries without any covering mound. The period of the Urnfield culture, like that of the Tumulus culture, was one of expansion, particularly during the first millennium B.C.E. It is during the period of the Urnfield culture that the Bronze Age was at its peek in Central Europe. They produced weapons, tools, eating and cooking vessels, etc. all out of Bronze. From the Urnfield Culture, the Celts emerge as an agricultural people.

Whereas the Urnfield people may justifiably be considered to have been proto-Celtic, their descendants in Central Europe, the people of the Hallstatt culture, were certainly fully Celtic. The Hallstatt culture and its successor, that of La Tène, together represent the iron-using prehistoric peoples of much of Europe. These are the Keltoi, the Galli and Galatae of classical writers. The two cultures are named after sites at which were found archaeological artifacts now considered to be representative of a particular stage of each culture. Hallstatt is a village in Central Austria at which was found an important cemetery; La Tène is near the north-eastern end of Lake Neuchâtel, in western Switzerland. In rough terms the Hallstatt culture existed from approximately 1200 to 500 B.C.E., with some overlap of the Urnfield culture. The La Tène culture in the parts of Europe which would soon become part of the Roman Empire ended with the arrival of the Romans. Beyond the Empire, such as Ireland and Northern Britain (modern day Scotland) the La Tène culture flourished until about 200 C.E..



This page last modified on: 07/30/1998 17:53:21

Copyright © 1996-1997 Michael Wangbickler. All rights reserved.
These pages are meant for education purposes only, and are not intended for commercial use. Any attempt to use these pages otherwise, will not be the responsibility of the author.

[LostTribe]

>And do I detect a hint of anglo-israelist nonsense?

Oh, my, nasty little attitude this morning? Why not respond directly to my 3-MINUTE HISTORY instead of cut and pasting by the yard from some unlinked site? I say not a word about "anglo-israelist" so you are headed in the wrong direction. If you think it is nonesense tell me what part of the 3 MINUTE HISTORY you disagree with, and we can debate it.

The article you stole from some other site reflects classical and obsolete celtic theory. The reason many old texts (copied from other texts, which were copied from other texts) assert central europe as the origin of the Celts is because of the very large celtic sites at Halstatt and LeTennes. Lazy thinking says "since these were big, they must be the mother ship", all others being the result of spreading out. However, more recent archeology has found the Celts in the Caucasus (as in Caucasians), in Turkey, in northern Iran and Iraq, and north of the Black Sea, right where the Lost Tribes of Israel went missing.

When the HUGE Northern Tribes, 1/10 of the worlds population, suddenly goes missing, and at the same time and the same place the CELTS appear, what is your explanation?

[LostTribe]

Having said that, the web site by Mr. Wangbickler is still a decent one for background on the subject of The Celts. Aside from the premises on the introductory page you cited, and some erroronous (too early) dating, I'm happy to put his address on the net as a Celtic reference.

http://www.accesscom.com/~wangbick/hallstatt.html

[Valin]

You might want too look at how the Asserians dealt with the nations they captured. They broke them up into small groups and scattered them throughout their empire.

[LostTribe]

>You might want too look at how the Asserians dealt with the nations they captured. They broke them up into small groups and scattered them throughout their empire.

I would be happy to look at that if you can give me a specific link. My impression is just the opposite, that the Israelites were kept together specifically as a buffer and a barrier against the Assyrians enemies, the reason they were taken into captivity to begin with. This purpose would seem defeated if they were broken up.

[Prodigal Daughter]

Nice to see my theory about media coverage of Israel voiced by a scholar and in print. Where can I sign up for Professor Eidelberg's curriculum? Good for him!

[Jtowner]

Speaking of anti-semites (and racists and American haters) did anyone notice Peter Jenning's comments about the Congressional race in Georgia, that Majette got money from JEWS, but he neglected to note that McKinney got her's from Islamics. ABC needs some E-Mails.

[js1138]

Do you have any evidence for your assertion about the Celts? Is there a consences among scholars, or just the ones you want to believe?