The war in Gaza has sparked some of the fiercest debates in recent history, not only about the scale of violence but also about the language and narratives that make such violence possible. A recent United Nations commission declared that Israel’s military actions amount to genocide. While such determinations are always politically contested, one theme emerges clearly in the discussion: the central role of dehumanisation.
To understand how mass killings, forced displacement, and destruction can unfold without widespread condemnation inside a society, we must look at how Palestinians have long been portrayed as less than human in Israeli discourse, institutions, and public life.
The Psychology of Dehumanisation
Genocide scholars widely agree that dehumanisation is a prerequisite for mass atrocity. Before large numbers of civilians can be killed, the victims must be stripped of their humanity in the eyes of the perpetrators. This often involves depicting them as animals, diseases, or existential threats, creating a moral environment in which killing them is framed as acceptable, even necessary.
The article highlights how Israeli leaders and media outlets have normalized language portraying Palestinians as “human animals,” “snakes,” or as a faceless enemy collective. Such rhetoric shapes public perception, making it easier to justify indiscriminate military campaigns in Gaza.
Historical Roots of Dehumanisation
The idea that Palestinians are fundamentally different—and undeserving of equal rights—did not begin with the current war. Historians and researchers note that this narrative dates back decades:
- Education: Israeli schoolbooks and children’s stories have included caricatures that depict Palestinians as monsters or dangerous intruders.
- Cultural Portrayals: Artwork and children’s drawings sometimes show Palestinians in demeaning or bestial forms.
- Political Identity: Policies have reinforced the idea that Palestinians are temporary inhabitants with no legitimate claim to the land, echoing themes of dispossession since the Nakba of 1948.
Through such channels, generations have been socialized into viewing Palestinians as a problem to be managed, not as a people with equal humanity.
Language of Leaders
Political leaders and senior officials have played a critical role in mainstreaming dehumanisation. Statements from high-ranking figures reinforce collective punishment and erase distinctions between civilians and militants.
One stark example came from former Israeli intelligence chief Aharon Haliva, who declared that “50 Palestinians must be killed for every Israeli life lost” and that it did not matter if those Palestinians were children. Such comments, amplified in media and political debates, establish a chilling moral precedent where civilian lives become expendable.
When leaders present exterminatory rhetoric as part of national security, it filters into public opinion and shapes military decision-making.
Public Opinion and Indifference
Polls within Israel show the effects of decades of dehumanising discourse. A significant portion of the Jewish Israeli public has expressed the view that no Gazan civilians are truly innocent. This belief helps explain why mass casualties—including thousands of children—have not produced major protests inside Israel.
Instead, public debate has focused more heavily on the return of Israeli hostages than on the humanitarian devastation in Gaza. This prioritisation reflects a societal framing where Palestinian suffering is either invisible or irrelevant.
Institutional and Systemic Drivers
Dehumanisation in this context is not only about language; it is embedded in institutions:
- Education Systems reinforce narratives that erase Palestinian history and rights.
- Media Coverage often frames Palestinians exclusively as aggressors, terrorists, or collateral damage.
- Political Structures support settlement expansion and displacement while minimizing the human cost to Palestinians.
Together, these institutions create what scholars call an “infrastructure of dehumanisation,” ensuring that hostile narratives endure across generations and crises.
Comparisons to Other Genocides
The Al Jazeera analysis draws comparisons to Rwanda, where Hutu extremists portrayed Tutsis as “cockroaches” before and during the 1994 genocide. Such rhetoric served to desensitise the population and justify massacres. The parallels are not exact, but the mechanism is familiar: treating an entire people as less than human opens the door to systematic violence.
Counterpoints and Complexities
While the UN commission’s conclusion of genocide adds legal weight, there remains global debate. Some legal experts argue that Israel’s campaign does not meet the strict legal definition of genocide, which requires proof of intent to destroy a protected group in whole or in part. Others say the rhetoric and patterns of killing clearly satisfy that requirement.
It is also important to recognise that Israeli society is not monolithic. Human rights organisations, left-leaning activists, and a minority of dissenting voices continue to protest civilian killings and advocate for Palestinian rights. However, their influence has been limited in the current climate.
The October 7, 2023 Hamas attack also shaped public opinion, leaving Israeli society traumatized and more receptive to dehumanising narratives. Fear and grief often fuel demands for collective retribution, even when international law prohibits it.
The tragedy of Gaza highlights how deeply words matter. Dehumanisation is not just rhetoric; it creates the moral and political conditions that make genocide—or actions tantamount to it—possible. By portraying Palestinians as subhuman, Israeli leaders, institutions, and parts of society have normalized extreme violence and mass suffering.
Whether the world ultimately judges these actions as genocide in legal terms, the human toll in Gaza illustrates the destructive power of sustained dehumanisation. Recognising this process is not just about accountability—it is also a warning for humanity: whenever one group is stripped of its humanity, mass atrocities become far more likely.
About The Author
