"Peace Activism":

Dennis Prager has an excellent column on the specific case of Rachel Corrie's death during her attempt at shielding a Palestinian home against an Israeli bulldozer, and the broader issue of idealistic peace activists. I will say that I have mixed, and mostly negative, feelings on the Israeli policy of bulldozing the homes of homicide bombers' families. I am not convinced that it is an effective policy. It may contain a measure of justice (assuming that the families are indeed accomplices, which is not necessarily the case), but it likely does much more harm than good. However, trying to stop a bulldozer by squatting in a house in the process of being torn down is not smart. Further, protesting the Israelis while supporting Palestinian terrorists is not a noble cause.

Some worthwhile snippets from the Prager column:

Rachel Corrie chose to side with a society that breeds some of the cruelest murderers of innocent people in the world. Rachel Corrie gave her life trying to protect people whose declared aim is to annihilate another country. In the name of saving children's lives, Rachel Corrie chose to defend a society that teaches its young children to blow themselves up and which deliberately targets children for death. And Rachel Corrie went to America's enemies to burn her country's flag.

And, specifically, his comments on peace activism, and “idealism” in general is worth reading, as I think he is spot-on:

We are told repeatedly that Rachel was idealistic -- as if that matters. Virtually every person who commits great evil -- the Nazi, the Communist, the Islamic terrorist -- is idealistic. Idealism is morally neutral. It is good only when directed to good ends. But in young people, idealism is at least as likely to lead to bad as to good because few young people are wise -- and idealism without wisdom is very dangerous.

We are told ad nauseam that Rachel Corrie was a "peace activist." So let it be said once and for all that most of these people are moral frauds. Why? Because "peace activists" routinely protest only against peaceful countries. Has there been one Evergreen State or other "peace activist" in Sudan during its Islamic government's slaughter and enslavement of millions of blacks? Are there any "peace activists" in Tibet to protect its unique culture from being eradicated by the Communist Chinese? Did you notice any "peace activists" trying to save the millions of North Koreans dying at the hands of their lunatic government? Of course not. Rachel Corrie and other "peace activists" only target peace-loving Israel and America.

An alleged love of peace at any cost, often leads to a furtherance of evil. The situation in Iraq underscores this--those who protest in the name of "peace" and the "Iraqi people" would have been satisfied with the status quo, which allowed Saddam Hussein to terrorize his population and use it wealth for his own selfish ends. Hardly a good trade off.

Posted by Steven Taylor at March 25, 2026 10:47 AM | TrackBack