One of the worst and dumbest in this debate

Anne Elisabeth Andersen, who describes herself as a journalist, has written one of the more unimaginative rants published by Aftenposten in this whole Gaarder debate (and that takes some doing). Her article is pretty much a recitation of tired left-wing political dogma, but she provides us with one interesting quote:

No state has the right to kill to assure its existence. (Ingen stat har rett til å drepe for å sikre sin eksistens.)

Check it out. Have your Norwegian friends verify the quote. And before you criticize me for quoting this sentence out of context, please take a note that this is a categorical assertion that summarizes everything that she's written before.

I wish I could agree with Andersen. The world would be a better place if states didn't kill to ensure their existence, and it would be even better if they never felt they had to. But as a practical matter, Andersen has her work cut out for her if she wanted to make this an accepted principle the world over. And Israel wouldn't be the first place to start.

Norway, in all its critical junctures, was founded, defined, and defended under war or threat of war. Whether at Harfsfjord, Svolder, Stiklestad, Moss, or Karlstad, the Norwegian owe the course of events to their leaders' willingness to kill off soldiers - their own and the enemies' - to assure the existence of a Norwegian state. And Norway has one of the least bloody histories around.

It is hard to know how Andersen would like to dig her way out of this categorical statement to make it more specific to the situation in the Middle East. A lot of people who read this will think that what she really meant was:

No Jewish state has the right to kill to assure its existence.

I don't think Andersen is smart enough to understand the important distinctions in all this. It seems she has accepted every bit of anti-Israeli conventional wisdom she's heard from her colleagues Odd Karsten Tveit and Sunnanå make part of their daily liturgy that they've all become unassailable truths to her.

Her article and the opinions she expresses in them are a good illustration of not just slovenly thinking but the power of political dogma.

Comments

[Sweetie Candy Land]

I agree with Andersen, and with your inserting of Israel rather than a country, for the mere fact, Israel is simply a proxy sate. Its citizens enslaved in the name of zionism.