We all travel in social worlds that expose us to particular ways of thinking. Our online and face-to-face lives often reinforce one another, even when we travel in multiple social circles. When it comes to politics, however, there are particularly significant consequences for limiting ourselves to one view of the world.
Elite pundits, decision makers, power brokers, thought leaders and lobbyists often reinforce one another’s world views and definitions of what matters most in the scheme of power politics, even when they advocate for different policies. The news-attentive audience takes on the vocabulary and perceptions of the dominant reporters. It is as if what gets reported is the only reality, or at least the only reality that matters.
A not-so-funny thing is happening in the discourse around Israeli-Palestinian relations.
Where some people talk about Israeli military security as the sine qua non, others may speak about Palestinian rights and a settlement freeze. But what no one is talking about in the major press is socio-economics. The actions and social worlds of those deemed insignificant and/or threatening to the elite groups remain invisible. Their struggles for change and to be seen are thwarted by obstruction of access to a wider audience: we, the public.
This myopia is a common trait, a struggle for each of us to overcome in our own personal and professional lives.
I do see the conflict being nurtured by the conventional, predominantly male elite portrayals of Israeli-Palestinian relations. I see resolution to the conflict impeded every day, not just by the current constellation of decision makers, but by the analysts and political thought leaders and reporters who cover the political space without referencing the matrix of socio-economics and political party affiliation that drives Israeli voting patterns.
Consider how different might be the world of political leaders were the news filled everyday with the work of activists, their visions, their persistence to humanize the “other,” and their motivation to change life for the better for both Palestinians and Israelis.
Might Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu, et al be so cocky to say “No” to the Arab Peace Initiative and to halting settlement expansion? Might even right-wingers Naftali Bennett and Avigdor Lieberman temper their positions?
Or might the dysfunctional features of their positions be unmasked to their followers if the peace builders and socio-economic factors were given as much as coverage as extant elite definitions of the conflict?
Let us see the elite pundits and political leaders as only part of the picture of how the world is working. Let us find ways to make the work of peace builders and labor organizers more visible, that their social worlds also enter our vocabulary and perceptions of what is and can be.
Let the diverse social worlds be equally and fully exposed to one another.
In this way the economic and human security dimensions of the conflict will become visible and more fully understood as pivotal in the persistence of and, conversely, to the resolution of the conflict.
Molly Freeman is a leader of the Bay Area chapter of J Street. She lives in Berkeley. Molly promotes civil society and women’s rights through educational projects.