Politics Opinion

Royal Commission under fire for excluding Palestinian perspectives

By | | comments |
Australia’s Special Envoy to Combat Antisemitism, Jillian Segal (Screenshot via YouTube)

The Royal Commission into Antisemitism has sparked debate over free speech, protest rights and the place of Palestinian perspectives in public discourse, writes Lyn Bender.

IS CONCERN for Palestine and the Palestinian people the new McCarthyism?

Named for the Republican Senator who spearheaded (literally) the hunting down of suspected communist “infiltrators” and “sympathisers”, within the film industry, educational institutions, the government and even the army. No stone was left unturned in the search to uncover this threat to America.

The current identification of antisemitism as any criticism of Israel bears a stark resemblance to the search for the communist peril.    

Protesting genocide has become a criminal offence in parts of Australia. People in Australia can be arrested for peacefully protesting ethnic cleansing and war crimes.

Thus far in the current Royal Commission into Antisemitism, the accused (by inference) Palestinians cannot bear witness or plead their case.

The Australian Palestine Advocacy Network (APAN), a peak Palestinian body, has been denied permission to present at the Commission. 

The Crucible, written in 1953 by Arthur Miller, reflected the communist purge in America of that time. Anyone could stand accused by the House Un-American Activities of being communist sympathisers. Hundreds of those in the film industry lost their jobs or were boycotted by association. This list included Charlie Chaplin, who became an exile from America.

The Crucible is a play about the hysteria generated in a community in 1693 in Salem, America, regarding accusations of witchcraft. The Salem witch trials were an allegorical device used by Miller.

The Bondi shootings were a terrible trauma for the Jewish community, especially those directly impacted. But the insistent call for a royal commission was a massive error. The shock and fear had not been processed, nor had the motivation of the alleged assailants been investigated. In fact, the Commission may be hampered by this being a case under investigation.

Bondi is an iconic Aussie meeting place for many Australians.

Bondi belongs to all Australians.

The surfers, the swimmers, the lifesavers, the joggers, the sunbathers, the tourists lured by its beauty and those who come to enjoy a coffee overlooking its waters may all lay claim to Bondi. But Bondi’s unique status as a safe place for all has been assaulted. That is a deep wound.

Despite its clearly narrow agenda, I decided to offer a submission to the Royal Commission into Antisemitism.

I struggled with the decision to make a submission to this Royal Commission, but felt compelled to add my voice as a Jewish person who is horrified by the suppression and failure even to acknowledge Palestinian suffering.

In fact, it seemed that somehow the protests against the genocide of the Palestinians were being unjustly implicated in this terrible act. Despite the facts thus far known, that no Palestinians were involved in the massacre, the measures against protestors intensified, especially in NSW.

Protesters have also been criminalised in Britain.

Police became heavier-handed with protesters. The media cited the protests, but seemed less interested in highlighting what the protests were about. Bombing and displacement in Gaza and settler violence that we could see on our iPhones every day.

Phrases became officially condemned. Saying “free Palestine” could get you banned or moved on. It was more acceptable to utter almost any curse other than intifada. Intifada is Arabic for shaking off or resisting. Which human would not wish to rid themselves of a brutal apartheid occupation? If a person states this idea, they are accused by the Israeli narrative machine of being supporters of Hamas or antisemitic or both. If you are Jewish, you are denounced as a self-hating Jew or traitor.

 Some appearing at the Commission have claimed that the display of the Palestinian flag traumatises them.

Transgenerational trauma is on display.

I can attest both personally and in my previous practice as a psychologist that transgenerational trauma is a psychological phenomenon. Growing up in a traumatised community or family imparts the trauma. Fears, beliefs and responses can be passed on non-verbally and behaviorally as well as verbally.

For some, trauma may lead them to have empathy for the suffering of others. For others, they may seek to become like the aggressor to escape victimhood. Bruno Bettelheim, who had been imprisoned in Nazi concentration camps and other analysts named this as identification with the aggressor. It’s a defence mechanism of those in traumatic and extremely powerless situations.

Many have noted that Zionism has become like Nazism, imprisoning, killing and torturing the Palestinians.

Worldwide, many Holocaust survivors and their children have been horrified by and denounced Israel for its treatment of the Palestinians. Many Jewish people with family connections to the Holocaust have marched in the streets carrying Palestinian flags and banners.

I found the boundaries specified for submitting almost squeezed me as the writer into delineating incidents of antisemitism. The saving grace was the question of social cohesion and how this might be impacted.

I responded that, firstly, I had received far more abuse and “antisemitism” from Zionists and pro-Israel Jewish people.

My view is that the Royal Commission is harming social cohesion.

Claiming that criticism of Israel is antisemitic, as proposed by the Envoy, Jillian Segal, is actually crazy.

That in failing to allow the “accused” Palestinians a voice at the Commission, it has fostered extreme social disunity.

I was not able to say all that I knew mattered. Even participating in this Commission feels as though I am part of a corrupted process.

My experience growing up in a community of Holocaust survivors was that we were indoctrinated, as in the U.S., with the belief that Israel was part of Jewish identity, a place of safety for Jewish people. That Israel could do no wrong. Jewish people were entitled to the land from the river to the sea.

Oh, the irony that Palestinian supporters are criminalised for using that expression. The absurdity of the assertion that Jewish people of European background somehow have the right of return while the Indigenous people expelled in the 1948 Nakba do not.

I am a supporter of the Jewish Council of Australia, which advocates for human rights for all and is opposed to the maltreatment of all abused groups, including Australia’s Indigenous people.

The absurdity of asserting that Jews are somehow one homogenous group.

But as I imbibed in my Jewish education, it is forbidden to kill. It is forbidden to steal. But Israel proudly proclaims its right to do both.

Claiming these atrocities on behalf of all Jewish people may account for a perceived rise in antisemitism.

Finally, we are all diminished when a tragedy, such as the Bondi shootings, is weaponised for political purposes.

Lyn Bender is a recently retired psychologist. You can follow Lyn on Twitter @Lynestel.

Support independent journalism Subscribe to IA.

 

 
Recent articles by Lyn Bender
Royal Commission under fire for excluding Palestinian perspectives

The Royal Commission into Antisemitism has sparked debate over free speech, protest ...  
The olive branch of hypocrisy: Herzog’s tree and Australia's complicity

Behind the pageantry of Herzog’s visit, critics argue Australia is ignoring legal ...  
Greta Thunberg’s Gaza stance ignites debate on protest and denial

As Greta Thunberg joins the Gaza flotilla, her activism forces a global reckoning ...  
Join the conversation
comments powered by Disqus

Support Fearless Journalism

If you got something from this article, please consider making a one-off donation to support fearless journalism.

Single Donation

$

Support IAIndependent Australia

Subscribe to IA and investigate Australia today.

Close Subscribe Donate