Learning the lessons of history and the cost of doing

As a humane philosophical position, pacifism has few equals. We in New Zealand have a proud connection to its development. Centuries before Mahatma Gandhi said "there are many causes that I am prepared to die for but no causes for which I am prepared to kill for" the Moriori leader Nunuku-whenua banned warfare and cannibalism in his tribe’s Chatham Island community, replacing physical conflict with ritual.

If New Zealand embraced World War I with an unrivalled per-capita fervour, a brave minority of conscientious objectors risked public disdain and sometimes prison for questioning the bloodbath. Ironically, one or two of these later become members of cabinet during the next global conflict, adjusting their principles relative to the brand of German opposition.

Throughout the 1920s and 1930s pacifism informed the appeasement movement and reluctance to meaningfully resist the rise of either fascism or communism. This was entirely understandable. A generation devastated by war looked for a civilised response to aggression. When Germany remilitarised the Rhineland in 1936, in direct violation of the Treaty of Versailles, the response was one which recognised more the inequities of that peace settlement than the action itself. If the Nazis wanted to “reunite” with their Germanic brothers in Austria, what business of it was ours? If they wanted the Sudetenland, then all of Czechoslovakia, was it worth going to war again for? Better to grovel with Chamberlain than die with Churchill.

A heavy price was paid for this humanitarian purity, not least by the Jewish people, the prime ideological target for Hitler and his hate-filled murderers. When faced with an implacable foe, one that has no respect for or recognition of your moral position, 'turning the other cheek' has terminal consequences. The descendants of Nunuku-whenua were slaughtered, enslaved and occasionally eaten. Seventeen million people were systematically killed by the Nazis, six million of them Jews.

Passive resistance has admittedly enjoyed some noteworthy successes, the independence of India and the end of segregation and civil rights advances in the United States of America among them. Consciences were stirred by sacrifice. I wonder how these movements would fare under Hitler, or Stalin, Putin or Xi Jinping. Or, for that matter, Hamas. Martyrdom would be assured, social and political progress rather less so.

Today's widespread opposition to the Israeli incursion into Gaza, an offensive provoked if not absolutely necessitated by the 7 October attacks by Hamas, no doubt has multiple positions and arguments. No one who values their humanity could be unmoved by the suffering and deaths of the innocent, particularly children. War itself is a crime against humanity, a fact that makes further distinctions irrelevant. To protest against war is a valid social and political act, one that commands a measure of respect.

A portion of the protest movement have revealed themselves as rather less committed to the ideals of pacifism. Sensitivity to the wider plight of Palestinian Arabs, besieged in their community as Israel itself is besieged by enemies who have historically denied its right to exist, has spilled over to partisan chanting, taunts and graffiti. Open antisemitism is heard in our streets, with little official or police response. The parallels with the 1930s are hard to miss.

The bitterest irony of this is that many of the folk chanting the likes of “from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free” are the very same people who have lectured us on “hate speech” in the past. Perhaps the genocidal meaning can be debated, as Green Party functionaries have attempted, but even to give the expression its least offensive spin is to ignore how many vulnerable people, with a first hand relationship to the Holocaust, perhaps survivors themselves or relatives of victims, interpret it. And this from a party which claims to be sensitive to inequality and racism. Parallels between the actions of Hamas and the Nazis have been inaccurate in one regard only: whereas Himmler, Eichmann and their evil minions attempted to shroud the death camps in mystery, often producing ridiculous propaganda to deny their existence, Hamas deliberately live streamed their atrocities, pandering to the more masochistic strain of anti-semite, those who enjoy watching beheadings, rapes, torture and baby killing. They did so indifferent to the plight not only of their direct victims but of the Palestine people who would bear the brunt of Israel's response. Judging by the amount of sympathy it has engendered in their cause in the west, it was a masterful if highly cynical stroke of realpolitik.

If war is an obscenity to be protested at each and every opportunity it is remarkable how the brutality of 7 October drew comparatively few New Zealanders into the street. There was an undeniable whiff of "they had it coming" to responses which foregrounded the oppressions of Palestinians even in the face of the murder of innocent Israelis. Perhaps some resisted the very idea of an "innocent Israeli".

Calling Israel to account for its actions in Gaza is of course not only legitimate but necessary. That said, the scale of protests against the Gaza offensive sits in stark contrast to the attention given the Russian invasion of Ukraine, the Chinese oppression of the Uyghurs and the ongoing civil war in Syria, where 230,224 civilians have been killed to date. If the deaths of particularly Muslim victims are a priority, where are the mass protests against Bashar al-assad, a man with untold more blood on his hands than Benjamin Netanyahu? Do protesters only bother picketing democracies, or nations with a belief in human rights?

As many an Israeli would concede, criticism of Israel, particularly with regard to its treatment of Palestinians, does not necessarily equate to anti-semitism. However, it is hard not to see such double standards and the vitriol with which the Jewish people are singled out for exercising a right to self-defence as anything but. When the statue of Sir Dovemeyer Robinson is daubed with a swastika we should be very mindful of the lessons of history and the cost of doing nothing.

■

Dr Richard Swainson runs Hamilton’s last DVD rental store and is a weekly contributor to the Times history page.