Instapundit (via Jay Fitzgerald) points out an interesting column by Charles Jacobs, which correctly points out that the left doesn't get its panties knotted over who is perceived as the victim (after all, aren't we all, ultimately, victims of the oppressive world order?), but rather based on who is perceived to be the oppressor.

Alternatively, imagine the ''wrong'' oppressor: Suppose that Arabs, not Jews, shot Palestinians in revolt. In 1970 (''Black September''), Jordan murdered tens of thousands of Palestinians in two days, yet we saw no divestment campaigns, and we wouldn't today.

But suppose they did? Just what powerhouse stocks would one divest oneself of if one wanted to protest the actions of Jordan, or the Saudi entity, or any other Arab country? Not to imply that they have any interest in protesting such countries' behavior, but if they did, given the paucity of industry, innovation and rational corporate and lending law of the Arab world, which are vital for enterprise, they'd have to find some other way to protest.

Ignoring morality issues (spurious or otherwise), from a purely financial perspective, Israel is worthy of investment (as was South Africa at the time). Arabia is not. That's what must change.

The Left chooses victims based on the victim's usefulness in making the Right look bad. It is the West's own internal political struggle that drives them not a desire to find and fix the worst human rights abuses. They choose victims based on the make up of their oppressors because they are only interested in oppressors who can somehow be linked to the political right within Western nations. All other victims are ignored.

Shannon Love's observations are in my opinion essentially true but I think it goes beyond "the political right of western Nations." For the most part it is simply the Left's hatred of Western values in general which leads to this phenomenon.

I believe that this hatred arises from the fact that Western nations had the power to acheive through the ballot box the glorious "worker's paradise" promised by Karl Marx, yet they rejected it. Adding even further insult to injury they withstood the menace of the USSR which ultimately crumbled.

To the hardcore proponents of the Left there is something inherently rotten and dangerous about a culture whose common citizens are instilled with beliefs that render them unable to perceive their own self-interests, which to the Left of course, means the adoption of socialism/communism. Therefore, it is desireable to destroy that culture by any means possible, especially by undermining the ideals, values and institutions that are common to the Western world. Their very selective "victimology" is just one tactic to attack the legitimacy of Western cultures.

"Just what powerhouse stocks would one divest oneself of if one wanted to protest the actions of Jordan, or the Saudi entity, or any other Arab country?"

Why, OIL, of course. If lefties truly cared about human rights (women's rights) they could make a statement by boycotting any distributors of Saudi oil. This would be doubly good for them, because oil is, after all, the great environmental satan (outside of nuclear energy).

Unfortunately, I'm of the opinion that lefty types don't really care about human rights OR the environment. I'm of the opinion that they choose these issues to wield as a stick to control us with, and that control of other humans' actions is the real goal of the political left. Which is also (although I'm persuaded by the 'oppressors as white/western' theory) why they turn a blind eye to oppressive regimes like China's, the Sudan's, Saudi Arabia... we all know the list. I think they don't pay attention to these countries, because at heart, they wish we were like them.