Replies to This Discussion

Permalink Reply by Neri Bar-On on March 23, 2008 at 8:49pm

Dialog is a powerful system, but there are conditions for it to be powerful.

As this is an open Forum, it is hard to control the conditions and a lot of discussions fall into the "my view" vs. "your view" and it lacks the generative property of the dialog when you find yourself see through the other person mind set.

I do not think that Dialog can stand by itself, it needs a system that enable our (Israelis and Palestinians) psyche to open up and set a view that contain all viewpoint. We some times get into this "dialog is good" position and actually make people think that Dialog cannot deliver any good since they experience this usual dialog flow "I am right you are wrong" .

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by John Wilmerding on March 23, 2008 at 9:22pm

Well, Neri, a site like this can contain many dialogues, as many possible dialogues as there are possible pairings and comparisons of viewpoints. They will all be imperfect.

But maybe many dialogues, and a few multi-logues, will eventually balance one anothers' imperfections out and make some sort of real difference.

And many, many of them together might possibly come to demonstrate the principle of 'the whole is greater than the sum of its parts'.

As westerner (me) and Israeli (you), we should be careful not to appear to be trying to defeat the purpose of this place of dialogue and communication. Every time someone contributes, they are trying to accomplish something. Most of the time, they are trying to make something positive happen. Is there a 'critical mass' possible of intentionality toward peace?

And/or is it possible to defeat the movement toward 'critical mass' by incessantly dissecting and criticizing what is happening here? And if so, who might benefit from that? Probably the dominating and oppressing side in the asymmetric conflict, yes?

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Mick on May 16, 2008 at 9:48am

I don't think the last particularly helpful as it just begs somebody to say something just as silly as "perhaps they're away building bombs", and then the last thing you achieve is dialogue. Maybe there's some satisfaction in venting, I don't know, I do know that dialogue can only be achieved by beginning on common ground, with the similarities rather than with the differences, and the differences shared. Throwing insults has never been particularly helpful, but John, I'm more than happy to engage in a dialogue about checkpoints and the fence, which has already saved countless lives on both sides, within the context of terrorist activity.

People need not only to speak to to listen and hear. For me a criterion is to see just how often a factual misrepresentation is refuted only to continue to reappear ... people weren't listening. As to why the Palestinians aren't participating ... I don't know. I fear that it may be cultural, more about pushing the point that they are right than achieving actual dialogue, a possibility Corey implied in his opening .... I hope not.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Corey Gil-Shuster on May 16, 2008 at 4:46pm

I was sort of hoping that a Palestinian would step in and speak to this but here is my theory on why Palestinians are not taking part in the dialogue (or much of any dialogue) to the same extent Jews are. And let me preface this by saying I am a Jew, an Israeli citizen, a Zionist so I am really trying to be objective to understand what we are dealing with.

From my brief experiences with Palestinians, they seem to feel that they have lost everything. In their view, Israel and the world has stolen their land, their culture, their history and they are slowly being erased. In their view, they have been giving up pieces of who they are through compromises (agreeing that Israel can exist, unofficially agreeing on a two-state solution on only a fraction of historic Palestine) which from their perspective is monumental. Because in their perspective, they deserve it all and they shouldn’t have to compromise at all. As they compromise more and more, they seem to feel they are losing more and more of who they are as Palestinians. So even dialogue with the “enemy” feels like they are giving up another piece of who they are, almost like if they give too much they will disappear completely.

I see it as a positive move forward that about half the members of this web site are Palestinians but we need more Palestinian input if we are really to find solutions for both peoples.

I don’t say any of the above so we feel sorry for one side (in this case the Palestinian). I don’t believe feeling sorry for anyone really helps. I just see this pattern over and over again where Palestinians have a very hard time even entering the dialogue and I think both sides need to understand why.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by mary rizzo on May 16, 2008 at 5:03pm

You wrote: "Perhaps that the notion of dialogue is not terribly fashionable for Palestinians right now."

This is a total misrepresentation of fact.

As a matter of fact, Palestinians are always trying for dialogue, (as well obviously as those who are adopted Palestinians such as myself) and they instead find many walls. One is allowed some kind of free speech only after extensive gatekeeping is made and if they disagree with things, even fundamental ones, they are considered as "not working toward peace". We see this all the time, in every forum, and here it is extremely clear to me even after only one day of participation.

Words have been put in my mouth, things I don't think so how could I have written them. It is because someone's idea of me is closed from the start. As well as a certain "tone" that does not encourage discussion and openness, and also a gang mentality of "I don't approve of you", that is supposed to influence the others.

Group dynamics are always in play. Dialogue is one on one, and cannot be had in a forum, but even for discussion to happen, many basic rules need to be adhered to, and they are actually more clear to Palestinians, who have had to listen for very long and are very used to what the rules on the other side are.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Paul RETI on May 16, 2008 at 5:18pm

Dear Mary,

You really are a whirwind. Here for one day, and you already ...

1) I do not understand what you mean by calling yourself an adopted Palestinian". I know nothing about you. Could you please expalin what that really means?

2) You say that: "Words have been put in my mouth". I've (perhaps ungallantly) referrred to your attempting to do that to me as "cute". I have not noticed any here do that to you. Please specify the case.

3) You've written several times that your questions have remained unanswered. Please tell us which ones, or better still start a dixcussion about those unanswered questions. That way any (lack of) answers will be clear.

Welcome. Please note that some patience is appreciated by most here.

Be well...
Paul RETI
Sydney OZ

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by mary rizzo on May 16, 2008 at 6:25pm

What do I mean by being an adopted Palestinian?... well, it is perhaps my identity, just as I have many parts of myself. I have been an advocate for the Palestian cause for three quarters of my life and a few people have actually "adopted" me into their families, so I suppose I can consider myself adopted, just as they consider me part of their families.

Words put in my mouth. Did I directly refer to you? I was referring to the fact that someone told me I had to assume he said something he didn't, which I never do. I limit myself to precisely what is written and I should not be expected to imagine what is not there, and at the same time, someone else assumed I said that all Jews had to be expelled from Israel and that Zionists were non-humans, which I did not! You have called my statements sloganeering, so, this is not quite the same as putting words in my mouth, but it certainly is not allowing the validity of my opinions based on reasoning, but just repeating slogans...

I have made specific questions, if you go back and look at my interventions, you can see where they are (especially that of having the characteristics of Humanist Zionism explained). You may look again at what I've asked you. I don't like to repeat, as I am sure you don't either.

I might have liked to start a discussion here (there is a post from my site that merits discussion, about the children in Israeli prisons), although I have three sites of my own where discussion of the things I am interested in take place. I was invited here by a friend of mine, but that doesn't mean that I am going to spend hours discussing with those who want me to debate. As a matter of fact, I have gotten a lot of instructions on how I am supposed to act and think and discuss, although of course, this is to show others that I don't know how to do it without being told. ..or else, discussion is not free and it is restricted to a certain view.

All that you really need to know (if you care) you can find in the places I write and edit. I appreciate that some like these forum debates, but I personally don't like them much because they do not evolve in a linear way and they waste a lot of everyone's time.

I have extreme patience, but I do not like people twisting things around. I am incredibly attentive to words used, and already a few times people have completely attempted to warp what I have said so that they can achieve something that I personally define as "making points".

So, you be well too.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Neri Bar-On on May 16, 2008 at 8:31pm

"these forum debates, but I personally don't like them much because they do not evolve in a linear way and they waste a lot of everyone's time."

I personally like these forum debates since I think that if we have "Linear Way" we end up in conflicts and war.

Israel "Linear Way" is destruction of any hope to Palestine identity, Palestine "linear way" is destruction of any Zionist hope. This is a conflict come out of "Linear Way"s.

I am sure that the change we need is not in any of these "Linear Way"s.


These Platforms let us interact over these "Linear Way" borders. We need the investigate solutions that are not exist in any "Linear Way".

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Paul RETI on March 23, 2008 at 8:25pm

I sometimes wonder whether people who claim to be really interested in dialogue are really interested in anything other than simply advocating for their preferred side.

To answer that, please go to the discussion A Petition for truly Peaceful Petitions.

Thanks...
Paul RETI
Sydney OZ

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Nitsana on May 15, 2008 at 6:56am

There is a group called the Interfaith Encounter Organization that i think does really good work. They meet on the basis of religious dialogue. They dont debate the issues for the same reasons that you discuss- but basically they will bring up an issue - like charity or forgiveness or prayer and each will bring up their religion's perception on that issue. So it is a group of each teaching their religion to the other and learning about the other's religion. I have been to a weekend encounter that they organized and this method enabled people to get to know one another without getting caught up in a point of view. Although when we organized events for this group in Tel Aviv with a largely secular crowd, it was less effective - as the issues were less interesting to them.

One idea that I had was to pick a charity project and work on it together as a way to just get to know each other as people - without trying to come to a unified opinion as to how to solve the overall problems of the region. And the stated purpose of the meetings should be - creating a more unified community in this region as a grassroots step for peace - so that people who come are not disappointed and dont feel that the group is ignoring the problem. just accepting that there are two different narratives and that we dont need to try and convince each other in order to accept each other.

▶ Reply to This

Permalink Reply by Jafra W. on May 17, 2008 at 1:42pm

under "http://internettime.ning.com/profiles/blog/show?id=656824%3ABlogPost%3A19009
The ability of imaginary Suspicion"
I've tried to cover your topic. It is important to understand what dailog means and which pre-conditions are required to start dialog.
Here is the core part
"
From my own story as an activist (Engineer and Manager as well), I have learned: "If you do not find a solution, change the rules" and "You can not change anything if you do not start with yourself and transform your own consciousness. Only then can you change the society/reality".
Starting by oneself requires "suspicion". Suspicion is also the condition for any real dialog. If both parties are "overconfident of themselves" then there is no more dialog. Either it is communication in positive way, where both agree 100% on the idea or it is a fight, a negative communication style where no one is listening to the other. Without two-way communication, there is only oppression, where the powerful side dictates its idea.
In other words, based on openness and imagination, uncertainty or suspicion is the main underpinnings of creativity and any transformation of reality. In any case this kind of flexibility is at the core of intellectual dialectic and mind shift.
For the spirit of activism, taking such a step is powerful and demands self-sacrifice. It requires the ultimate in responsibility, which will surely lead to understanding what it means to BE Palestinian.
"


- Each group has a different narrative that they work from. Each group then understands what is happening today through the lens of that narrative. Each side believes its narrative is the correct one and spends massive amounts of time and energy trying to convince the other side (or the world) that its narrative is the correct one. Dialogue quickly turns into debate and oftern gets stuck at that stage.


Corey, each side was collecting his own power against the other through manifesting his own absolute narrative. In other discussion I've tried to analyse why and how it came to such development.
In nut shell, If we ever have had honest dialog we would have created common narrative. Today the whole humanity is co-creating one narrative. We are getting more and more part of it. It is just a matter of time. No one can stop this evolution, because it is natural one.
There is a majority does not recognized that evolution. It is the responsibility of "new-world"-community to build the bridges for them.


- Because the two narratives are so different, when faced with the others narrative, it is a common assumption that the other is “manipulative”, “liars”, “brainwashed”, etc. Few people ever question their own narrative because that is too threatening. Instead each group will dig up information (usually only partially related) that proves how their side is right and the other side is wrong.


correct: This is language of war! From each point of view, no one chose this war.
There is one different: Israel needed this war to be created. Palestinian was not organised in a movement of self-determination, the majority has lived peaceful in their homelands. They are the bigger victim. They have to pay for the crimes of others (Anti-Semitism) . They have to pay for the weakness of Arabs ..
Fanatic Zionism has nothing in own eyes, than looking for secured existence on any cost. http://www.palestineremembered.com/Acre/Famous-Zionist-Quotes/Story...
There is sure much more ..
Here is a collection in German http://www.arendt-art.de/deutsch/palestina/zionismus_ist_rassismus_...



- As the dialogue/debate progresses and each sides finds more and more information to prove its point and attempt to convince the other, two things happen: each side convinces itself of how right their side is and listens less and less to the other side. From experience, very few ever seem to leave the debate with a different opinion than they had before.


Here you have to add, that normal people did not have the chance to develop any dialog platforms. I lived under israeli occupation; the wall has already existed virtually that time.



So I have two questions:

1) does anyone think dialogue is moving both peoples towards understanding each other better?


My answer above is Yes. We need a polarisation of narratives.


2) does anyone have a better approach to creating understanding?


I have the feeling we are knocking the wrong doors and open wrong discussions.
It wont work this way Corey!
This thread would make more sense if it is pre-programmed. In general is about the productivity of this community. Currently I am learning about spiral dynamics: We are by Level 3 (Red) within our development. We do not have any idea, where are moving to.

How can we influence the current political situation with this discussion?
How can this community reverse the reality of the apartheid wall?
How can this community influence the situation in Gaza? How can this community move Israel to talk to HAMAS?

These are difficult question, but at the end we want to see our efforts blooming.

Collectively "we" have to design seeds for whole-scale applications and methodologies in relation to this conflict based on modern thesis's and technologies . It is very complicated, put possible.

▶ Reply to This

• 1
• 2