Explaining Israel to a 10-Year-Old (Judean Rose)

It can be difficult to explain Israel’s right to exist to the online haters and debaters. After all, not all of us are Eugene Kontorovich. And since we’re not, how can anyone expect us to have all the complicated legalese at the ready to plead the legal twists and turns of Israel’s case? It’s better, instead, to keep things as simple as possible: We were here first. It’s ours.

But that’s not always as easy as it sounds. Take Quora, where I’ve been answering questions about Israel since 2011. I try to keep my answers uncomplicated so they will be easy to remember in future debates.

Quora, however, has a policy called “Be Nice, Be Respectful.” Violate this policy and Quora will collapse your answer. At this point, the moderators generally give you the option of editing your answer and allow an appeal. For me, that’s good enough, since I can usually find a workaround and rephrase.

An edit may mean changing “Palestine doesn’t exist” to “At this point in time, there is no state called "Palestine.” Which is a lot more complicated, but satisfies everyone, all around. You get to the point where you can spot what language is likely to trigger a report, so you can avoid such language right out of the starting gate. And if there’s a hiccup and an answer is collapsed, I edit and resubmit, and there’s no further problem.

Note that the Israel-hating Quorans stand ready to pounce on any perceived policy violation by the Israel-loving Quorans. It’s a war out there on Quora. The hope is that by reporting us, the Israel haters will get us permanently banned from the site. Once that happens, our truthful answers about Israel will disappear.

I was a top writer in 2018, and the best Quora answers come up in Google queries. I therefore see it as kind of mission to keep my content diplomatic enough to suit Quora moderators so my responses will stay up there on the ‘net, offering a truthful account of what Ruth Wisse calls “The Arab War Against the Jews.”

This can be a delicate balancing act. Not everyone is capable of coloring inside the lines. That goes for either side of the fence.

Rima Najjar, for instance, was permanently banned on Quora for her (apparently) anti-Israel/antisemitic content. I never read her stuff so I’m only guessing. I’m not sure what, exactly, was objectionable. But according to her Jewish friend Benay Blend, Quora is biased in favor of pro-Israel voices like my own and in banning her, is discriminating against Najjar.

This supposed bias is the reason Najjar filed suit against Quora and it’s nonsense, as I explained a little over a year ago in this space (see: Blend and Najjar Implicate Me and the Israel Forever Foundation for Getting Banned on Quora). If Najjar was banned, it wasn’t because of a pro-Israel bias, but because she couldn’t figure out how to speak Quora-ese. She likely found it hard not to sound hateful when discussing the Jewish State. Thus, Najjar violated Quora’s Be Nice, Be Respectful, one too many times and was banned for life.

It would have been difficult for Najjar to prove bias, since Quora is an equal-opportunity hand-slapper, collapsing answers and banning users on either side of the Israel/Anti-Israel divide. Najjar must have realized this fact. Because the academic subsequently dropped her suit in March (h/t Elder of Ziyon).

As I said, there’s always a work-around on Quora and Najjar could have still been on Quora today, happily typing out her hate for Israel, as long as she couched things in neutral, inoffensive terms. But hiding the truth of what one really thinks is an art and it’s definitely not always easy. The other day, for example, I answered a question:

“Can you explain the Israel-Palestinw [sic] conflict to me like I'm 10 years old?”

“This will be fun,” I thought, rubbing my hands together with glee, before formulating an answer, which was this:

A long time ago, God gave the land of Israel to the Jews. It is a beautiful and special land, so everyone was jealous and they are still jealous now. Other people keep trying to take bits and pieces of the land, and when the Jews won’t let them, they attack the Jews in all sorts of cruel ways, for instance sending exploding balloons over the border so Jewish children will play with them and get hurt. Or they’ll explode a pizza shop at a time when it is likely to be full of Jewish kids on summer vacation, having fun.

Instead of seeing how wrong it is to steal Jewish land and hurt Jewish children, the world sides with the thieves, the people that keep trying to take Jewish land, the people hurting Jewish children. Why? Because the world is mad that the Jews don’t want to switch religions. They figure it makes their newer religions look phony and false and that hurts their feelings.

Also, Jews tend to be smart and successful, and even though there aren’t a lot of them, they tend to rise to the top no matter what they decide to do with their lives. This makes other people jealous of the Jews. Which is stupid. They should instead study the Jews and try to copy them.

Not long after I posted this response, I of course received a message that the moderators had collapsed my answer for violating the Be Nice, Be Respectful policy. I was invited to edit and appeal.

But for some reason, this time, I balked. I knew exactly what language needed changing to suit the moderators, but I just didn’t care. I had written the truth: this is what I would have said to a ten-year-old to explain things, to MY ten-year-old. To any ten-year-old.

I saw no reason to change my answer if that’s not the way I’d say it to a ten-year-old. Ten-year-olds don’t understand political correctness. It makes no sense to add a lot of language to obscure the truth and give it a neutral makeover. Such language would lengthen my answer and overly complicate things so that a child would come away more confused than before.

Which is why, after thinking it over for a couple of days, I opted to submit an appeal without editing my answer, as follows:

Dear Moderator, the question asks how I would explain things to a ten-year-old, not how I would couch things in a politically correct manner to satisfy the Quora moderators. This actually is what I would say to a ten-year-old. Using more neutral terms would render the explanation unintelligible or confusing to a young child. I say that as a parenting expert and a mother of 12.

Kids understand only the simplest language. As such, I would venture to suggest this was a trick question intended to trip up a pro-Israel Quoran, triggering by design, perceived violations of the Be Nice, Be Respectful policy. I believe this is the reason the question was edited after the fact: after I answered the question. This gives the question an entirely new meaning, so that my answer may seem mean-spirited in some lights, instead of merely honest.

Just as there are frivolous lawsuits, this was a frivolous report, to get me in trouble: collapsed or banned. I hope you will reconsider your decision in the interest of freedom of speech on Quora.
Thank you for your consideration.

Note that somewhere between when I answered the question and my response was collapsed, the original poster changed the question. It now says: “Can you explain the Israel-Palestine conflict to me (I'm 10 years old)?” The edit is meant to exaggerate the supposedly harmful effect of my response. We’re no longer discussing a thought experiment. Instead, my answer stands retroactively, as an actual response to a ten-year-old child.

Which is why I didn’t expect for a moment that I would win my appeal. I figured the moderator would determine that my answer is “hate speech” and collapse it for good. This has happened on occasion.

"So be it," I thought. 

What some Quora moderators call "hate speech" I call "the truth.”

And sometimes I’m just not willing to lie.

I had a surprise, however, when I looked at my inbox this morning. There was a new notification: Quora had uncollapsed my answer.

Rima Najjar would say the moderator's decision reflects the same pro-Israel bias that led to her permanent ban from the social media network--that in responding favorably to my appeal, the moderator sided with Israel. But I think the decision is a sign that sometimes reason prevails, at least on Quora. On Quora, it turns out that speaking to a moderator like an adult, allows me to explain Israel to a ten-year-old. 

This is a refreshing contrast to the prevailing ethos at social media giant Facebook, where "Death to Israel" fails to violate community standards. It's a whole 'nother ballgame from Twitter, where despots are deemed to be just rattling sabers when they call for the annihilation of Israel and the Jews.

Quora is different. At Quora I sometimes lose. But sometimes I win. In this round, I got to explain Israel to ten-year-olds. Which seems a good enough reason to stay in the game. 

For now.

---

---

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

Read More

When the Truth is Treated as Hate Speech (Judean Rose)

On January 22, I answered this question on Quora:

Why do you think there is so much violence between, the Zionist settlers and Palestinian villagers in the West Bank? Can the Ask an Israeli/Ask A Palestinian project help quell some of that violence?

I responded as follows:

The question is by way of asserting an untruth: that there is some sort of mutuality to the Arab war against the Jews (see: The Arab War Against the Jews). Jews don’t attack Arabs. The opposite is true: Arabs attack Jews.

This fact has nothing to do with settlement, which has only to do with housing. There is nothing wrong with housing, by the way, unless you believe that Jews have no right to live in homes. Which would be an extremely racist position to hold.

This project you mention is total anti-Israel propaganda because of the question it asks, which, like the question you ask, asserts an untruth, and there is no balance to the assertion. The project cannot quell what does not exist.

Even the terms used in your question assert untruths and spread bigotry. The term “West Bank” for example, asserts that Jordan is the rightful owner of Judea and Samaria (their proper geographic labels), though only two UN member states (Britain and Pakistan) accepted Jordan’s occupation of these territories between 1948 and 1967 as a legal one. The use of the word “settlers” as if it were an epithet, when all these people are doing is living on land that was acquired during a defensive war, land that belonged to their people for thousands of years. Land that shares the name of these people (Jews/Judea).

Why use the word “Zionist” in tandem with the word “settler”? Because the question asserts the untruth that there is some sort of reciprocity to the violence, using the words “Zionist” and “settler” tells anyone who reads the question to equate “Zionist” and “settler” with gratuitous violence against Arabs. Of course, there is no truth to this, as Jews are not attacking Arabs. The opposite is true and has been so for thousands of years. Arabs attack Jews. Period. There is no equivalent violent action toward the Arabs by the Jews.

The term “Palestinian” is also a piece of propaganda, as there has never been a sovereign Arab state known as “Palestine.” The term is used only to delegitimize the State of Israel, the Jewish State and in reality has no meaning.

My answer received 15 upvotes and may have received many more, except for the fact that the moderators collapsed my answer, and requested an edit, suggesting that my response violated Quora’s “Be Nice, Be Respectful” (BNBR) rule. Here is an excerpt from the official Quora explanation of its BNBR policy: 

Do your best to see the world from the perspective of the person who posted the question (the original poster ["OP"]) or answer. It is often not helpful to criticize or challenge the fundamental beliefs of the OP (in an answer) or answerer (in a comment). For example, in responding to the question "Is it OK to only go to church on Easter?", the following answer would be considered disrespectful and is not allowed: "There is no God and religious rituals are a waste of time." Use good judgement and be empathetic. Answers and comments that challenge the fundamental beliefs of an OP or answerer will be held to a very high standard re: Be Nice, Be Respectful.

I knew what was bugging the Quora moderators here, I won’t pretend I didn’t. They didn’t want me speaking of “Jews” and “Arabs” but of “Zionist settlers” and “Palestinians villagers” as the OP did. They didn’t want me to challenge the assertions of the poster, but see things from his or her point of view.

Now sometimes I will edit my responses when challenged by Quora, because the whole reason I’m on this forum is to spread the truth. Why cut off my nose to spite my face? Would it have killed me to go politically correct?

Here, for instance, I might have changed the language to “Israeli Jews” and “Arab terrorists.” That might have mollified the moderators.

But this one really bugged me. The rebel in me was screaming: Since when is the truth not “nice” or “respectful?” I was only telling the truth: except for the rare exception, Jews are not attacking Arabs, but Arabs are attacking Jews. Not all of them, but a large percentage of them, and often.

It is what it is. What it isn’t, is bigotry. I used Professor Ruth Wisse’s excellent presentation, The Arab War Against the Jews, to back my assertion. I did not say that “all Arabs” attack Jews.

I believed, strongly (still do), that my answer was both fair and factual. And the curmudgeon in me was refusing to bend to an anonymous moderator’s will. To me, “Palestinian” is a propaganda term (see: Israel is Engaged in a War of Words) and it goes against my personal ethos to use the word.

So there I was, confronted with a choice of editing my answer, or appealing the moderator’s ruling. I decided to appeal, offering to edit whatever it was that was dishonest or offensive. I wrote:

My answer was factual. I see nothing in my answer that abrogates the Be Nice, Be Respectful rule. I was careful.

I would edit my answer to suit your guidelines, but see nothing to edit. If the moderators disagree, perhaps they could point to something specific in my answer that was rude or disrespectful so that I might make edits, as requested. Otherwise, I think my answer should be reinstated.

I really hoped to receive a reasonable response, explaining how I might edit my response. I must confess to feeling shocked at the ruling I instead received:

Hello Varda,

Your content was in violation of our Be Nice, Be Respectful policy. This core Quora principle requires that people treat other people on the site with civility, respect, and consideration. To learn more about this policy, please visit: https://www.quora.com/What-is-Quoras-Be-Nice-Be-Respectful-policy.

More specifically, your content contained what we consider to be hate speech:

Users are not allowed to post content or adopt a tone that would be interpreted by a reasonable observer as a form of hate speech, particularly toward a race, gender, religion, nationality, ethnicity, political group, sexual orientation or another similar characteristic. Questions and question details about generalizations in these topics should be phrased as neutrally and respectfully as possible.

Our decision is final, and your content will not be reinstated.

If you see content that is objectionable, we suggest you either report or downvote it. You can report questions, answers, comments, and messages by clicking on the "Report" link which is located underneath the content.

We appreciate your understanding. 

Sincerely,

Amelia
User Operations
Quora

At this point, I was upset. Hate speech?? But okay, I was willing to try to edit my response. I didn’t want anyone to think I was spreading hate. The option to edit, however, had disappeared with the moderator’s ruling. I could no longer edit my answer, which remains collapsed to this day.

One bright note in this uncomfortable episode, a comment left by Brenda Newman:

“This is what gets collapsed these days? Answer may need improvement? I thought it one of your best. Apparently, decoding the language used in the propaganda war isn’t allowed.”

---

---

We have lots of ideas, but we need more resources to be even more effective. Please donate today to help get the message out and to help defend Israel.

Read More