Study: Punishment Only Collective When Jews Impose It

Punishment is eight hundred times more likely to be “collective” when the negative treatment occurs at the hand of Jews.

Davos, July 3 – A group of researchers examining the nature of Newtonian principles has discovered an ontological anomaly in the application of action-reaction principles, whereby the term “collective punishment” can only correctly be applied when the party imposing the policy or action is Israel or Jews, a new scientific paper reveals.

In the journal Annals of New Teachings in International Systems of Economic, Military, and Institutional Theories of Ethnicity (ANTISEMITE), a team of scholars will publish an article in next month’s edition describing their work, which investigated the nature of collectivity, punishment, and the mysterious ways in which punishment is eight hundred times more likely to be “collective” when the negative treatment occurs at the hand of Jews or the State of Israel.

Lead author Thinly Veighled detailed numerous cases of the phenomenon in current events, and noted that no other group appears to have its preemptive, precautionary, retaliatory, or otherwise defensive handling of violence automatically defined as unjustly affecting the general population beyond the perpetrators of that violence.

“This anomaly is most visible in the Boycott, Divest, and Sanctions movement,” explained Veighled, “adherents of which decries Israeli restrictions on Palestinian movement – implemented as the result of terrorist attacks in order to prevent further such incidents – as unjust, collective punishment of the Palestinian population, all the while calling for all of Israel to be subjected to economic, diplomatic, and cultural isolation, regardless of the views and activities of any individual Israeli.”

A similar manifestation of the phenomenon appearing in the article discusses the contrast between Egypt’s far more restrictive administration of its border with the Gaza Strip than Israel’s, in which context the term “collective punishment” is seldom, if ever, applied to Egypt’s policy. In the ontology of Israeli policies, however, the article notes that Israel’s naval blockade of the coastal territory, imposed to prevent weapons smuggling and protect Israeli communities threatened by rocket and mortar fire from Gaza, is automatically assumed to be collective punishment of Gazans.

“Israel’s border with the Gaza Strip is far more porous than Egypt’s, the article notes. “Thousands of tons of goods, including food, medicine, and construction supplies, cross from Israel into Gaza every week, whereas the Rafah crossing to and from Egypt remains closed far more often than it opens. And Egypt has demolished large swaths of Rafah on its side of the border to destroy underground tunnels, uprooting hundreds, even thousands, of innocent residents. However, nothing about the human relationship to Egypt’s actions indicates that society treats, or must treat, that policy as collective punishment. It appears to be a uniquely Jewish attribute.”