My e-mail volume exploded once Jerusalem Post columnist Larry Derfner decided to commit career suicide.
He wrote that, “I think a lot of people who realize that the occupation is wrong also realize that the Palestinians have the right to resist it — to use violence against Israelis, even to kill Israelis, especially when Israel is showing zero willingness to end the occupation…If we were to say very forthrightly what many of us believe and the rest of us suspect — that the Palestinians, like every nation living under hostile rule, have the right to fight back, that their terrorism, especially in the face of a rejectionist Israeli government, is justified — what effect would that have? A powerful one, I think, because the truth is powerful.”
The e-mails basically fell into two camps. There was the “We Need To Make Sure He’s Fired camp,which, while possibly a little harsh, actually contrasted quite nicely with the “Slow and Painful Death” camp. What, some of the e-mailers asked, did I, an apologist for people like Derfner, think about my friend now?
So with all due apologies to apologists everywhere, let me just say this: When Derfner was eventually fired, he should not have been surprised. That’s not because I don’t believe in freedom of speech: Derfner was free to speak and he spoke. But I do believe in journalistic competence.
Columnists need to express their views clearly and thoughtfully. They should also impart some degree of wisdom, make us question our beliefs, occasionally reinforce others. and give us a few “aha” moments. Derfner’s column failed miserably on the “clear,” “thoughtful” and ‘wise,” and the “aha” moment was more of a “palpable anger/severe disappointment” moment. Few if any views were likely changed or reinforced.
Derfner’s job security was also not best ensured when he tried to justify intentionally targeting civilians, whether he felt the actions were a result of the victim’s military being vastly outclassed or the occupying country adopting deeply intransigent policies. Frankly, when a paper’s customers and advertisers say they don’t like the journalistic product you’re selling and stop moving their money to your employer, then we have what we apologists call an excuse to remove said problem.
Of course, Derfner doesn’t really want Israelis to be killed. He was actually (he now says) trying to “stop that from happening” by encouraging Israel to change its policies. I get that. Many Israelis and Jewish supporters of Israel want that.
Derfner is clearly frustrated. He thinks the current government is leading Israel into a dark abyss. That abyss presumably contrasts nicely with the lighter shade of abyss Derfner would lead us into by effectively rationalizing terrorism and providing a level of moral justification for violent actions against civilians — actions the Palestinian leadership no longer supports or encourages.
So to make his point he may have gone a little overboard. In fact, Derfner says he mixed up his word choices: ” …I realized now that the terms ‘right’ and ‘justify’ in connection with the killing of Israelis were wrong, even obscene….” He regrets not the fact he was fired, but that he doesn’t have the opportunity to “fill in the picture that’s been so distorted,” a picture Derfner mistakenly painted as a later period Picasso instead of as a Rembrandt. In fact, Derfner now (several days later) wants us to know that his “intent was not to support, endorse, advocate, encourage or call for terror against Israelis, but to end it.”
Hopefully Derfner will use the extra time he will now have pursuing his new freelancing freedom to polish up his journalistic skills. Then the next time he has the opportunity to compose a widely read column, he won’t need to spend as much time translating his hidden meanings. Or risk harm to Israel, both by giving solace to those who seek to justify unjustifiable actions and by unintentionally marginalizing those who. like me, believe that Israel must recognize a much higher sense of urgency in achieving a two state solution if it wants to avoid losing its Jewish and democratic soul.
{ 2 comments… read them below or add one }
I've rarely cared for much of Derfner's writing. I had assumed JPost kept him as a caricature of a liberal/leftist. Someone generally so outlandish and irrational their readership could use as a counterpoint to reject all liberal perspective. Let's see if the next JPost house lefty is more credible or another straw dog.
Agree 100 % His writing didn't help our cause.