Conscience at War: The Israeli Soldier as a Moral Critic

6. Forms of Criticism: From "Voice" to "Exit"

6 Forms of Criticism From "Voice" to "Exit" This chapter tries to locate the action of selective refusal during the Intifada within the range of moral criticism during this conflict. For the sake of analysis, we choose to (partially) borrow the concepts of 'voice' and 'exit' from Hirschman's (1970) model ofresponse to pressure in the world of business. In Hirschman's model, "loyalty," "voice," and "exit" represent three modes of response to declining participation in a social organization; the dissatisfied customer can select a course of action from one of these three basic options. "Loy_ alty" means choosing to remain silent, placing self-interest or commitment to the organization above the accountability of the event. "Voice" means choosing to speak out about the problem identified in the situation. It is an attempt to change rather than escape from the situation, and is seen as a political action par excellence. "Exit" means the act of leaving the organization; it is seen as an option of last resort. This chapter, however departs from the model by regarding selective refusal of military service within the Israeli society during a war situation, as a form of exit rather than a form of voice as the conventional research of civil disobedience would indicate (Ben Noon 1990; Gans 1992; Sheleff 1988). We will argue that within the psychology of moral connection and given the unique Israeli setting , it is possible to view exit as and extended form of voice (Linn, 1995c). According to Walzer (1977), resistance to participating in a given war might be seen as minimizing one's own danger at the expense of others: "To disobey is ... to claim a moral separateness 105 106 Conscience at War (or moral superiority) to challenge one's fellows, (and) perhaps even to intensify the dangers they face" (p. 315). Thus, the study of selective refusal is primarily a study of the decision to separate oneself from the shared understanding of that society as a form of "moral selfishness" (Walzer 1968, p. 14), or the study of exit as a moral position. Walzer's claim of moral separateness is particularly applicable to the Israeli society with its emphasis on a collective moral orientation along the life cycle of the individual (Levy 1990; Linn and Gilligan 1990, Peleg 1990, Student 1991; Sobel 1986). We argue that fearing to lose their moral identity (which they constructed in a connected form) dissatisfied Israeli reservists would be inclined to assume various positions of criticism before they choose to exit themselves from an instituion (the IDF) that enjoys the highest consensus in the country (Gal 1986). We would argue that the Israeli reservist would prefer channeling his protest in the form of voice before assuming a position of exit, since the position of exit is an extremely (morally) painful one that some decision makers would try to avoid. The forms of criticism under review are presented as following inner developmental phases: I. Voice Ia. Primary Voice-direct protest of reservists A. Protesting the physical burden of the service B. Protesting the moral burden of the service i. protesting the nature of the commands ii. protesting the alienation iii. protesting the duty in morally problematic sites and military roles iv. protest movements v. protesting Holocaust symbols and metaphors (see chapter 7) lb. Secondary Voice-individual and group protest on behalf of fighting soldiers II. Exit IIa. Internal Exit-refusal of military service i. 'White' refusal (see chapter 4) ii. 'Gray' refusal lIb. External Exit-rejection of life in Israel i. Emigration (in Hebrew yerida-literally descent) ii. Suicide Fonns ofCriticism 107 Analysis I. Voice 10. Primary Voice-direct protest of reservists A. Protesting the physical burden of the service When the load is easy to bear, the inequality in the division of burden hurts your sense of justice, but does not bother you too much. If two people have to carry a load of two libras together, one of them will be able to carry it alone. But if the load is 400 libras, there is a need to divide the load equally, otherwise, the person who has to carry the load by himself will collapse and the mission will not be performed." These words, by Louis XVI's Minister of the Treasury, uttered 216 years ago, appear in a detailed letter sent by 100 fighting reservists during the Intifada who complained about the burden of reserve service. It was organized...