The Consequences of Empire

March 12, 2006

In the Spring of 2005, Londoners could read the following announcement of a new play at the Royal Court Theater.

JERWOOD THEATRE UPSTAIRS Taken from the writings of Rachel Corrie MY NAME IS RACHEL CORRIE Directed by Alan Rickman 07 April 2005 - 30 April 2005 Evening Performances - Monday – Saturday 7.45pm Saturday Matinees - 16, 23, 30 April 4pm Press night(s) - Thursday 14, Friday 15 April 7pm Why did a 23-year-old woman leave her comfortable American life to stand between a bulldozer and a Palestinian home? The short life and sudden death of Rachel Corrie, and the words she left behind. MY NAME IS RACHEL CORRIE has been developed by Alan Rickman and Katharine Viner, in collaboration with the Royal Court International Department. With the kind permission of Rachel Corrie's family. Cast: Megan Dodds. Running time 1 hour 20 minutes (no interval) This performance is now SOLD OUT, please contact the Box Office on 020 7565 5000 for returns.

They could read a review by Michael Billington in The Guardian, the last two sentences of which were:

Theatre can't change the world. But what it can do, when it's as good as this, is to send us out enriched by other people's passionate concern.

With that kind of enthusiasm in London it was perfectly reasonable to make arrangements to produce the play in New York. Or so everybody thought.

Early in March, the New York project was far enough along that it was in rehearsal by the New York Theater Workshop and scheduled to open on or about March 27, 2006, concurrently with a rerun in London. On March 7^th the NY Times reported (March 7, 2006, "Tensions Increase Over Delay of a Play"):

Mr. Nicola [the NY Theater Workshop's artistic director] said last week that he had decided to postpone the show after polling local Jewish leaders as to their feelings about the play, which follows the story of Rachel Corrie, an idealistic American demonstrator who was crushed to death by an Israeli bulldozer in March 2003 while trying to prevent the destruction of a home in the Gaza Strip.

Why is this so significant? Wasn't this "merely" the death of a demonstrator who, having lost out to the process of eminent domain, was accidentally killed while making a last-ditch attempt to prevent the clearance of land for a shopping center?

I would like to deconstruct the Times' paragraph for the purpose of re-introducing the content which was probably purposefully drained out of it.

Jewish leader What is a 'Jewish leader'? A person of the Jewish faith who leads other members of, presumably, the same faith. It implies the existence of an organization, an organizational framework, a set of principles, and a goal which the (Jewish) leader and his followers are pledged to uphold and to promote. The purpose of the organization is to multiply the power of the leader in the task of advancing its goals. Knowledge of this goal is essential to understanding the paragraph. The Times leaves this essential information unstated.

My belief is that the unidentified (Jewish) organizations are agencies of the state of Israel, directed by it, for the purpose of promoting the state interests of Israel.

Rachel Corrie According to the article she is "an idealistic American demonstrator." Her ideal, again surprisingly unstated, is also essential to understanding the paragraph. I didn't know Rachel but I've read a few of her emails to her mother written in the last few weeks of her life and these make her ideal immediately obvious: Rachel was profoundly committed to preventing injustice. The depth of that commitment led her to risk, and ultimately to sacrifice her life. Here are a couple of paragraphs from two of her emails and a photo as she was dying in the arms of friends which make this very clear.

Rachel Corrie, as her life ebbs away after being run over by an American bulldozer, driven by an Israeli, in Rafah, Occupied Gaza, at 4:47 PM, March 16, 2003. She was 23 years old.

The count of homes destroyed in Rafah since the beginning of this intifada is up around 600, by and large people with no connection to the resistance but who happen to live along the border. I think it is maybe official now that Rafah is the poorest place in the world. There used to be a middle class here - recently. We also get reports that in the past, Gazan flower shipments to Europe were delayed for two weeks at the Erez crossing for security inspections. You can imagine the value of two-week-old cut flowers in the European market, so that market dried up. And then the bulldozers come and take out people's vegetable farms and gardens. What is left for people? Tell me if you can think of anything. I can't.

(…)

All of the situation that I tried to enumerate above - and a lot of other things - constitutes a somewhat gradual - often hidden, but nevertheless massive - removal and destruction of the ability of a particular group of people to survive. This is what I am seeing here. The assassinations, rocket attacks and shooting of children are atrocities - but in focusing on them I'm terrified of missing their context. The vast majority of people here - even if they had the economic means to escape, even if they actually wanted to give up resisting on their land and just leave (which appears to be maybe the less nefarious of Sharon's possible goals), can't leave. Because they can't even get into Israel to apply for visas, and because their destination countries won't let them in (both our country and Arab countries). So I think when all means of survival is cut off in a pen (Gaza) which people can't get out of, I think that qualifies as genocide. Even if they could get out, I think it would still qualify as genocide. Maybe you could look up the definition of genocide according to international law. I don't remember it right now. I'm going to get better at illustrating this, hopefully. I don't like to use those charged words. I think you know this about me. I really value words. I really try to illustrate and let people draw their own conclusions.

Anyway, I'm rambling. Just want to write to my Mom and tell her that I'm witnessing this chronic, insidious genocide and I'm really scared, and questioning my fundamental belief in the goodness of human nature. This has to stop. I think it is a good idea for us all to drop everything and devote our lives to making this stop. I don't think it's an extremist thing to do anymore. (My emphasis)

Thus the Times' "idealistic American demonstrator" was killed resisting the injustice of the Israeli policy of destroying the homes of Palestinians, a policy which is supported and funded by the United States for the purpose of furthering its imperialistic goal of dominating the oil reserves of the region.

This is where the "Jewish leaders" and their organizations for promoting the state interests of Israel enter the picture. They pressure the producer of the play My Name Is Rachel Corrie to suspend its opening because it would expose the ideals of Rachel Corrie to a few Americans who might discover that they share them.

In summary: An imperial interest of the US [oil] in a specific region of the earth [Middle East] is promoted by a vassal state [Israel] within that region. The protection of the interest of that vassal state within the US deprives Americans of the benefit of the right of artistic expression as freedom of speech.

The right of freedom of speech is guaranteed in the US Bill of Rights. The President is sworn to uphold those rights. In actual practice the President's silence on this issue is proof that US imperialism takes precedence over the Bill of Rights.

How do you end this outrage? Either end the imperialism which causes it or watch US democracy go the way of the very democratic Weimar Republic, which ended in Hitler Germany.