All stories are not equal.
But we all equally live in stories.
Who we are we know by the story we tell ourselves. We spin the points of meaning we meet into a yarn, and the yarn we weave into a fabric, the fabric we shape into the clothes which we wear when we appear before the world and the people in it.
We may clothe ourselves in the dress of a rationalist, a follower of numbers and hard evidence. We may clothe ourselves as a storyteller in complete control of the tales we tell. But we all alike are within a larger tale, a greater meaning, in which our own stories are only threads or quilting, part of the tale but not all of it, our telling being told in turn to others learning to tell their own tale — we serve as examples, as cautions or as heroes.
But for facticity — it’s just like the Mossad-trained sharks the Egyptian press reported in 2010. Or the eagles, vultures, and storks Turkish pundits claimed were deployed by Israel as spies.
Subconsciously, consciously, or with transcendent vision, we all serve the story alike. The question is only: do we serve it well? Is our story told aware of its being nested in the stories that came before? Does it serve to nest the stories that come after? Is it worthy of the great tale of which it becomes a part? Does it serve the end of the greatest good?
Some stories do not.
Two stories were first told in medieval Europe. Both took hold; one has kept that hold ever since, being retold in ever-changing variations.
In 1215, Pope Innocent III established transubstantiation as official Church doctrine. By 1243, there is a record of Belitz, a German Jewish community accused of stealing a communion wafer to crucify the transubstantiated Messiah again. This resulted in the burning to death of all the Jews of Belitz. This story was repeated and Jews were punished in at least 23 more incidents until the last recorded instance in 1631.
The story does not bother to relate to the real world, for the point of the story’s telling was to brand Jews as creatures of mythic evil, alien to all that is good. Its most grotesque absurdity is its premise that Jews firmly believed in transubstantiation, if only to use it for their satanic purpose. The Reformation took the air out of the story, as the doctrine of transubstantiation, among others, was no longer a common point of all Christians. It became too obscure to raise people’s blood.
The other story started earlier. It is still virulently alive. The blood libel first appeared in Norwich, England in 1144 when the Jews there were accused of murdering a Christian child as a Passover sacrifice. This story spread through England, then mutated and spread to the continent, where it brought death in its wake. Century after century, it survived debunking by authorities in church and government. It is alive all over the Middle East, wherever facts are seen as a threat to the truth, and power alone decides what you must consider right.
The now-infamous Nicholas Kristof story featured as a New York Times op-ed last week comes from the same pedigree as these old stories. Kristof is easy on the facts, relying on anonymous sources and unverifiable assertions. But he has a Consequential Message.
Why waste time? Kristof begins with his conclusion: “The horrific abuse inflicted on Israeli women on October 7 now happens to Palestinians day after day.”
Here is his story in fine. If you are not persuaded at this point, only gullibility or ignorance will help. His sources are either anonymous or Hamas apologists. Nor does he allow his readers to persuade themselves of the truth by hearing how the purported facts stand up to cross examination. His powerful assertion is treated as self-evident. To agree with it is an act of faith.
In this kind of a story, questioning the evidence is morally repugnant. For this story is meant to create facts and empower a movement that will bring justice — the kind that needs neither facts nor cross-examination. He wants to substitute a new reality for the facts he prefers not to face.
So, it is as simple in what it proposes as the medieval tales, and even the object of its wrath is the same. What Hamas did on October 7, says Kristof, is exactly what Israel is doing systemically to Arab civilians on a daily basis. I say it because it is true and it is true because I say it.
This is Ouroboros devouring itself, tale first.
Or as the Latins called it, petitio principii — the conclusion is contained in the premise, and the argument is only a story that begs the question.
But Kristof can surprise. He states without qualification that, “There is no evidence that Israeli leaders order rapes.” Only 1984 doublethink can maintain that thought together with his thesis that rape is Israeli policy and thus they commit October 7 — but every day, with American help.
But why should logic matter when evidence does not?
But for us, both logic and evidence matter. Here’s the evidence of his evidence-free approach: Kristof gravely asserts that Israel has trained dogs to sexually assault Palestinians.
Now that’s not some obscure point. Sex sells.
But for facticity — it’s just like the Mossad-trained sharks the Egyptian press reported in 2010. Or the eagles, vultures, and storks Turkish pundits claimed were deployed by Israel as spies. Or the claim that Israel was killing Arabs to harvest and sell their organs.
Or the blood libel.
A tradition of storytelling, easy on the facts, with a track record.
Kristof’s fellow travelers in the Times’ fact-light Israel coverage published his piece a full day before reporting the other story. The timing was no coincidence: they wanted Kristof to eclipse it — not through merit, but through maneuver.
The report issued in Israel by the Civil Commission on October 7th Crimes by Hamas Against Women and Children took months of work. It includes more than 400 interviews with eyewitnesses and thousands of photographs and videos, a great many of them taken by Hamas themselves and posted on the Net.
Here, facts matter. And they are searing and robust, deniable only by those who value power over truth.
Kristof makes it clear what is at issue. It is truth. It is a coherent world in which we know our stories are all contained within a supreme story in which the soul, the mind, the heart, and the body are all united. It is the world towards which our civilization aspires and works.
Thanks to him for the clarity. It’s the best thing about his whole take on the issue.
READ MORE from Shmuel Klatzkin:
Power, Islamism, and the Crisis of Western Rationality
Higher Law and Human Law: The Religious Roots of American Freedom
