Reading Response 7

This last selection really highlights an overlooked trait of the contemporary conflict. Too often, the contemporary conflict has been framed as exclusively a religious struggle, rooted in fundamental and irreconcilable differences. This explanation ignores immeasurable complexity. Yes, the contemporary conflict has overt religious aspects. However, it is incorrect to consider these religious aspects in isolation. As demonstrated by the Israelite response to the destruction of the first temple, religion is used as a means to concentrate identity within an uprooted and fractured society. In the face of extreme hardship, both Jews and Muslims use religion to establish consistency; in an ever changing situation, a concrete reference point is highly desirable. Contemporary extremists epitomize this trend. I do not believe it is coincidental that religious extremism, both by ultraconservative Jews and Muslims, arose after extended periods of hardship and subsequent desperation. Thus, religious emphasis is a byproduct of the conflict, not the root of the conflict.

I consider the contemporary conflict to be the result of an extended series of unfortunate events. Whether by the hands of the empire-building aggression of ancient Babylonia, post Dark Ages Christian revivalism, or WW1 era British scheming, the region has experienced millenia-long sustained upheaval. The consequences of these events has, over the years, compounded to a perfect storm. In a resigned perspective, the contemporary conflict can be compared to witnessing a car crash. The witness knows what is going to happen, can't stop the forces in action and can only close his eyes and wait for the inevitable crash. Unfortunately, too few individuals are willing to look at the conflict outside of a narrow framing. The factions in play are very much falling victim to a gambler's fallacy. After investing so much into the conflict, they can't escape the hope that eventually the investment will pay off, instead of recognizing the futility of being a sole "winner" and cashing the chips.

On a general note, I very much enjoyed reading Jerusalem - One City, Three Faiths. Armstrong's account was extremely well crafted. Jerusalem is an expository work; however, it is not dry or pedantic. With regards to actual content, I enjoyed Armstrong's thoroughness. The subject is ambitious; 6000 years of history is much to cover in a few hundred pages. Armstrong succeeds in conveying the city's historical trends; furthermore, she does so without the stark subjectivity often seen in discussions concerning the city. To this end, Jerusalem is an enlightening read and well worth its inclusion in the class' curriculum. All actions create reactions.