Well, lookie here: I was mentioned in the NY Times “On Comedy” column for a standup set I did filled with jokes about Israel and Palestine ("This is how Jews handle crisis."). Also mentioned in the piece: Dave Chappelle and Larry David. I’m now tryna start a group chat with ‘em called “button pushers.” We’ll see.

Here’s the set:

And while we’re talking about the Middle East…

How to oppose Israel without sounding like a moron (or anti-semite)

You can oppose what Israel is doing in Gaza without sounding like a moron, naif, or anti-semite. But judging by how few are pulling it off, it seems to be a tricky tightrope to walk. Follow these steps if you want to mindfully criticize Israel without coming off like a dolt…

Know your history.

A lot of people talking about Israel/Palestine seem to think history started when TikTok was invented. I know, studying the past sucks. It takes time, it’s boring, and you surrender the luxury of ignorance. Instead, you are forced to swim in the depths of context, where the currents twist madly and answers are murky, if they even exist at all. But fail to do so and anyone who does understand history will just write you off as a dope.

Here’s an analogy: Imagine I told you I had some EXTREMELY STRONG opinions about the Taylor Swift/Scooter Braun beef. I’m coming in hot, baby! I’m outraged by it and I won’t stop yelling my .02 from the rooftops (ok, posting about it on social media…but still!).

You might tell me you’re a Swiftie who’s been following their feud forever, but I won’t care; I’m here to tell you what’s what. And I’m gonna do it with a massive amount of certitude and moral superiority.

If you’ve been following their feud for a while, you might have some questions for me:

• Why did Taylor accused Scooter of “manipulative bullying” in 2016?

• What’s Big Machine Records?

• What happened at the 2019 American Music Awards?

• Why do some Swift songs have “(Taylor’s Version)” in the title?

Imagine if my answers were “I don’t know,” “never heard of it,” “I’m not sure,” and “uh, her vocals are louder?” You might wonder how I could have such a strong take about a conflict when I clearly don’t know the history, context, and nuance of it.

Well, that’s how people who have spent a lifetime immersed in the conflict between Israel and Palestine feel nowadays. They keep seeing people discussing it like there’s a simple, black/white version of what’s happening there, which is comically reductive.

I fantasize about a world where people have to demonstrate they know at least some relevant history before they’re allowed to spew a hot take online. You know those "select the squares with a fire hydrant" things they make you complete before you get to log in to web apps?

Imagine if we could get something like that before someone’s allowed to post about Israel/Palestine – but instead of fire hydrants, it’s a history quiz that asks:

• What’s an intifada?

• Who were Yasser Arafat and Yitzhak Rabin?

• What happened on Yom Kippur in 1973?

• What were the Oslo Accords?

If you don’t pass, you can’t post. It’d be a super way to eliminate the opinions of doofuses, because right now my timeline overfloweth with those.

If you know nothing about the role of the Ottomans, the British, the UN, other Arab countries, or what happened in the region in 1948, 1967, 1987, 1993, 2000, or 2005, stop spewing and start reading. Otherwise, you sound like someone reviewing a book after reading only the last page.

Realize social media is feeding you crap.

That social media companies profit from bitter tribalism ain’t helping. No wonder we keep seeing an avalanche of images and videos that stir fear, outrage, and anger (all the better to monetize you with, my dear).

That, in turn, leads to an endless bounty of moral posturing. Amazingly, we've all pivoted from being experts in epidemiology to gurus of international politics. Our hubris knows no bounds! And I know that because I am a master philosopher.

Author Derek Thompson on the folly of using social media to form fierce opinions:

Social media offers the illusion of moral clarity about news events 6,000 miles away that are substantively confusing even to people 6 miles away. If you're gobbling up social media to reach strongly held opinions about late-breaking news, you're making a feast out of garbage.

If you can’t read up, listen to a podcast (Thompson and Ezra Klein have both put out good deep dives). Just don’t be a meme zombie.

Avoid utopian thinking.

It’s easy to condemn without offering any sort of reasonable alternative. That’s why there’s so much "I don't know what Israel should do, but I oppose everything they actually do" messaging going around.

Of course it’s fair to criticize Israel. Here, I’ll do it:

Collective punishment is grossly unfair. People aren’t responsible for the actions of their government. Even if Israel kills off Hamas, then what? Is there a plan or are we just witnessing vengeance? It feels like Israel could be making the same mistake America made after 9/11. Killing thousands of innocent civilians will probably just create a new generation of terrorists. Also: Bleeding kids on the news every night ain’t exactly helping in the PR war. Is it that hard to create safe zones for civilians and do more to avoid any appearance of war crimes? Because if Israel is seeking security, inflaming the rest of the world doesn’t seem like the best way to achieve that objective.

However, I’ve yet to hear of a path for Israel to eliminate Hamas (something Israel now sees as an imperative for its survival) that doesn’t involve civilian casualties. Is there another way for Israel to live in security and peace?

Ned Lazarus, a peace activist who’s dedicated much of his life to seeking peaceful change by working with both Israelis and Palestinians, writes, “I envy those who know exactly how Hamas can be stopped without any more killing, because I don’t.” He argues any alternative plan must convince the actual decision makers in Israel that whatever happens next will result in sustainable security.

The only way to avoid a ground offensive is to provide a realistic strategy for removing Hamas’s ability to attack Israel on this scale again. That alternative must be convincing not to liberal observers in the West, but to the actual decision makers in Israel, who disastrously failed to protect their citizens on October 7. If anything is clear in hindsight, it is that cease-fires do not provide sustainable security: Hamas used the years since the 2021 cease-fire to prepare its 2023 assault. An Israeli ground offensive is a grim prospect, which will cost even more Israeli and Palestinian lives, with no guarantee of success. I say this with deep sorrow—but I have yet to hear any credible, effective alternative.

Israelis will eventually vote out the current government. That moment will be the greatest opportunity for peace in the region in decades. But the new Israeli government will have no one to negotiate with unless Hamas is eliminated. If you want lasting peace, it’s quite possible that an invasion that results in the elimination of Hamas is your best hope.

Beware of the mob.

I'd throw a "Don't kill innocent civilians, but also Israel has a right to defend itself against a death cult that uses human shields and stores weapons in hospitals, so it's tough to say what the right approach is" rally, but our chants would be way too wordy.

That’s the problem with yelling: You’ve got to keep it simple. And life is rarely simple.

A mob mentality usually just leads to more hate. That’s why I tend to avoid rallies of any kind. I don’t care what you’re rallying for or how noble the cause. Once you get hundreds of people together all chanting the same slogans, things get dumb. It turns into a parade of pandering intended to incite. Folks start yelling stuff simply because it rhymes. Eventually, the megaphone winds up in the hands of some idiot who feels “exhilarated” by mass murder or, even worse, wants to recite slam poetry.

Resist an overly simplistic ideology of oppression.

It’s comforting to view the world through a Luke/Darth prism. You get to plug stereotypes into a formula and ignore nuance. But we’re witnessing the limitation of this worldview as we (bizarrely) see feminists supporting rapists and queer people defending those who would murder them on sight.

This is the danger of embracing a narrow ideology as some kind of Grand Unified Theory of politics. It’s en vogue to view the world through an oppressor/oppressed prism that focuses on skin color. But the truth is more complicated than that – and it’s rather ethnocentric to apply an American prism to every problem around the world.

Some other folks have already written eloquently about this:

The Decolonization Narrative Is Dangerous and False by Simon Sebag Montefiore.

[The decolonization narrative] is that it is almost impossible for the “oppressed” to be themselves racist, just as it is impossible for an “oppressor” to be the subject of racism. Jews therefore cannot suffer racism, because they are regarded as “white” and “privileged”; although they cannot be victims, they can and do exploit other, less privileged people, in the West through the sins of “exploitative capitalism” and in the Middle East through “colonialism.”

This leftist analysis, with its hierarchy of oppressed identities—and intimidating jargon, a clue to its lack of factual rigor—has in many parts of the academy and media replaced traditional universalist leftist values, including internationalist standards of decency and respect for human life and the safety of innocent civilians. When this clumsy analysis collides with the realities of the Middle East, it loses all touch with historical facts.

The Deep Roots of the Left’s Deafening Silence on Hamas by Yascha Mounk.

Many people on the left have now embraced a very simplistic notion of who is dominant and who is marginalized—one that imposes American conceptions of race onto situations in which they distort rather than illuminate underlying realities…Key parts of this ideology now provide cover for forms of racism and dehumanization of vulnerable groups that should be anathema to anybody who genuinely cares about the historical values of the left. It is time for the many reasonable people who have bit their tongue as these ideas took on enormous power in mainstream institutions to raise their voice against them.

As university crowds cheer Hamas, the intellectual left has rarely been less moral by Shlomo Klapper.

The hip intellectual move today is to see everything, everywhere, as an example of the oppressor-oppressed dichotomy…The intuitive appeal of such black-and-white thinking is seductive. Is there anything better than feeling like part of an international movement of the underdog? What is more soothing than a wall-to-wall, all-encompassing moral vision? Such a vision divides the world into right and wrong, good and bad — and you’re always in the camp of the good guys.

Plus, for these intellectuals, the cost of this luxury belief is free. When you’re living in Brooklyn or Berkeley, you’re protected from the conflict itself. So you get the warm, fuzzy feeling of moral superiority while someone far away pays the costs. Best of all — it immediately simplifies our otherwise complex reality. You have power? Bad. You’re less powerful? Good.

What could be wrong with that?

Because it offers moralism without morality. Because it intentionally ignores reality in favor of an intellectual hologram.

There’s civilization and then there’s barbarism. If your ideology can’t separate them, it’s time to find a new one.

Don’t forget how the world reacted before Israel retaliated.

“This is entirely about Israel’s attack on Gaza.” Really? Because there was a period between Hamas attacking and Israel retaliating and it was people holding up swastikas, chanting “gas the Jews,” signing aggro open letters, and acting like Israel got what was coming to it.

At that point, the hateful response wasn't about Israeli bombs dropping or kids trapped under rubble. It was a mask drop of just how many people felt "Jews deserved this." Every Jew saw it. And everything since has been colored by that moment.

And now we see a wave of anti-semitism spreading throughout the rest of the world too. It sure does feel like people were itching to bust out some good ol’ fashioned Jew hate. The more that happens, the more Jews feel like protecting Israel at whatever cost.

Acknowledge anti-semitism and what Jews have been through.

Look, we all know the Jewish peoples long history of starting wars and indiscriminately killing folks. Just like we've always done for centuries. It’s what our religion is all about. We're a combative people with an insatiable thirst for blood. Yup, THAT is the issue. *

* Sarcasm feels like the most Jewish way to handle this.

Jews are really frightened right now. And that’s saying something because, well, we’re always frightened. After all, nearly all of our holidays fixate on our suffering. It’s a lesson: No matter where we go, eventually they will come for us. And all we will have is the lord and each other.

Unfortunately, it’s been proven true over and over again. If you want to know why Jews are freaking out right now, it’s not just ‘cuz of mooks storming an airport or blue stars in Paris. Study up on the medieval mass killings of Jews in many Christian and Muslim societies, the Khmelnytsky massacres of 1640s Ukraine, Russian pogroms from 1881 to 1920, the Holocaust, etc. We have cause.

Also, it’s spooky how little focus there’s been on the massacre that started all this. When it comes to garnering sympathy, Jews are like the cauliflower in a veggie platter. Everything else gets noticed first until there's no choice left but to acknowledge us.

American Jews have the luxury of deluding themselves in a way Israelis, surrounded by enemies, do not. A sword hangs above their heads constantly. And now they’re supposed to pull back and try to coexist with Hamas, a death cult that doesn’t seem to care about the lives of Jews, the lives of Palestinians, or even their own lives?

I know one Israeli friend who took refuge in Berlin. When Jews are going to Germany to feel safe, you know things are truly f*cked up.

Face the brutal reality of war.

Surprisingly, many people don’t seem to understand how war works.

I’m no general but what I’ve gleaned: When one army invades another and refuses to surrender, the war continues. Sadly, innocent civilians perish as fighting continues (see bombings of Dresden, Hiroshima, etc.). Just because civilians die, doesn’t mean war crimes have been committed though. Eventually, one side or the other surrenders. After that comes peace. This is the painful path to reconciliation.

What almost never happens: A stronger army gets invaded and then agrees to a ceasefire without retaliating. Like, can you imagine if Pearl Harbor was attacked and America was like, “Aw shucks. Guess they got us. Anyway, moving on.” I mean, c’mon.

If you fail to clock that, congratulations on when/where you were born. You are incredibly privileged to have lived a life where the brutal reality of warfare is completely foreign to you.

War is hell. Don’t start one if you can’t finish it. And if one side invades and then wants the conflict to end, they should surrender or expect it to continue. “Ceasefire now” is a nice notion, but it seems pretty out of touch with how the world (and war) actually works.

Know Israelis hate Netanyahu too.

Think Netanyahu and the right wing religious zealots he partnered with to return to power are a bunch of goons? Good news: Israelis largely agree with you. Before all this, they were taking to the streets regularly to protest this government’s authoritarian tilt. And now, they’re even more furious because Bibi failed to keep Israel safe, his “you had one job” task.

You know who Netanyahu reminds me of? Rudy Giuliani. Two flashy (when they were young), charismatic, brainy guys who loved cameras, gained fame in the 80’s, came to power in the 90’s, became addicted to the status and power, refused to yield the stage, teamed up with far right religious freaks in order to cling to power, and are now watching their careers sink in a toxic combination of infamy, incompetence, and indictments. Power soured both of them until it all went completely off the rails. Oh, and horrible terror attacks from radical Muslims happened under both their watches. The parallels are spooky – and so are they.

Accept that two competing narratives can both be true.

Which side’s suffering should command the public’s attention and sympathy? Hold room for the possibility there are multiple realities here and that both sides have a true, heartbreaking story to tell.

Wisdom requires accepting complexity and nuance instead of binary thinking. As F. Scott Fitzgerald wrote, “The test of a first-rate intelligence is the ability to hold two opposed ideas in the mind at the same time, and still retain the ability to function.”

Or as psychologists put it: Embracing the messy gray is crucial.

It’s easier to make money by peddling one extreme position than by encouraging nuance and complexity. Additionally, when we experience cognitive dissonance, the perception that two ideas or actions contradict one another, we become uncomfortable and try to resolve the contradiction. It’s also more effortful to wrap our heads around a complex situation with multiple perspectives than to settle for a simple answer…Black and white is easy, but balance and truth are in the messy gray.

The “I am the real victim here” mentality is the biggest drug of the modern age and we are all addicted. But writer David Simon argues both sides must acknowledge their shared complicity.

F*ck everyone ready to monologue on one half of this long, ornate, tragic tale of a half century or more while magically forgetting every last shard of your brother's half. You will share the same narrative, and begin at least to contemplate the whole tale and everyone's shared complicity, or you will keep preaching to your rancid, rote-brained choirs and bleed together for another few generations. If you think you come away clean from your history, your religion, your ideology, you are a fool and you will never begin the long march back from hell.

No one comes away clean. And the people who think their story is the only one to tell are bound to keep bleeding.

So there you go. Process all that and then criticize Israel all you want. Seriously, I’d love to see more constructive commentary from fair-minded pro-Palestinian folks who know their history and don’t just want to shout angry chants and rip down flyers. We’re gonna need empathetic types on both sides if there’s ever gonna be a path forward.

Share

Comedy

🃏 I post clips of my standup (and more) at Instagram, TikTok, Threads, and YouTube.

🃏 Check out my other newsletter that’s all about standup: Funny How: Letters to a Young Comedian

🃏 Listen to my podcast:

Kind of a Lot with Matt Ruby Stereoactive Media 31 episodes

🃏 Here’s a bonus clip from my “Substance” special:

Quickies

🎯 So Socrates way of "teaching" was to just constantly ask questions? What the hell is the point of that? Don't you feel like that's pretty annoying? Is it possible Socrates was just a d*ck?

🎯 I am a climate change denier. I mean, I’m in denial about everything else in my life, why should climate change be any different?...