The Weaponization of Meaning: How Semantic Terrorism Shapes the Current Conflict

The events of October 7, 2023, marked more than just a massacre. It began a new kind of warfare. This warfare operates simultaneously on physical and psychological fronts. This conflict is not confined to the battlegrounds of Gaza or the streets of southern Israel. It plays out in the language we use. It also appears in the images we consume. The narratives that shape our perception of reality reflect this conflict too. Both Hamas and the Israeli state have employed what I call “semantic terrorism.” They strategically use language and media to distort meaning. They manipulate emotions and redefine truth.

The “Images of Terror” and the Hostage Dilemma

Hamas’s October 7 attack was not just a military assault. It was a carefully staged media event. The attackers designed it to inflict psychological trauma far beyond its immediate victims. Hamas fighters used GoPros and live-streams to document their own atrocities in real-time. They broadcast images of bloodshed and fear to the world. This deliberate act aimed to amplify the terror. Every Israeli became a target of what Jean Baudrillard called the “images of terror.” They were targets, whether directly threatened or not, but not of rockets or gunfire.

Baudrillard, a French sociologist and philosopher known for his theories on simulation and hyperreality, made a compelling argument. He stated that modern terrorism is as much about symbolic power as it is about physical violence. His essay The Spirit of Terrorism (2002) was written after 9/11. It explores how terrorism uses media to magnify its impact. It turns isolated events into spectacles that haunt entire societies. The real power of terrorism, according to Baudrillard, lies not just in the immediate violence. It also resides in its ability to manipulate meaning. Additionally, it creates a sense of collective vulnerability.

Hamas’s use of hostage videos is a prime example. These recordings weren’t just appeals for negotiation. They aimed to make the viewer feel as if they were part of the violence. This approach extended the psychological reach beyond the battlefield.

According to Baudrillard, hostages in such contexts are not just bargaining chips. They are symbols that make the whole society complicit in the spectacle of terror. This blurs the line between victim and observer.

Pro-Hamas Media and the Battle Over Truth

Hamas’s semantic warfare did not end with these images of terror. Immediately following the massacre, pro-Hamas media outlets launched a campaign of denialism, spreading contradictory narratives to erase their culpability. Some claimed the massacre was an “inside job” by Israel; others argued that Israeli victims died from “friendly fire.” This disinformation aimed to sow confusion, polarize opinion, and undermine any coherent narrative of the events.

This tactic aligns closely with Baudrillard’s concept of “hyperreality.” In this concept, the distinction between truth and fiction collapses. It leaves only a swirl of conflicting narratives. In this hyperreal landscape, facts become malleable. The meaning of events shifts depending on which narrative one chooses to believe. Pro-Hamas media pushed false claims. They created endless debate over the “real” story. This action turned reality itself into a contested space. It made it harder for anyone to grasp the full scale and horror of what transpired.

Israel’s Counter-Narrative: The Language of “Total Victory”

At the same time, the Israeli state engaged in its own form of semantic warfare. Officials and media repeatedly invoked the term “total victory,” a phrase that sounds definitive but lacks clear meaning. What constitutes “total victory” in this context? Does it mean eradicating Hamas, or something more ominous, like collective punishment of the entire Gaza population? The ambiguity of the term is its power. It rallies public support. It does so without specifying the moral and practical implications of such a goal.

Simultaneously, Israeli media and politicians framed the conflict in biblical terms. They called for the annihilation of Gaza and dehumanized the Palestinian people. Phrases like “there are no innocent people in Gaza” became commonplace, justifying indiscriminate violence. This language promoted a victim mentality. Narratives of Jewish supremacy and eternal holy war reinforced this mindset. As a result, any criticism of Israeli actions seemed like a betrayal.

Baudrillard’s theories again help illuminate this phenomenon. In a state-sponsored simulation, suffering is selectively erased, and only one side’s pain is emphasized. The state hid the devastation in Gaza from the Israeli public. It constructed a narrative in which Palestinians are always the aggressors. They are never seen as the victims. This dehumanization serves to justify continued violence. It makes it easier to maintain public support for military actions that would otherwise be seen as morally indefensible.

The Weaponization of Words: A War on Meaning

In both cases, the conflict has moved beyond physical violence into a war over meaning. Hamas manipulates language and imagery. They aim to depict themselves as freedom fighters. Meanwhile, Israel’s state narrative seeks to blur the line between military and civilian targets. They pursue this in the name of “total victory.” This is semantic terrorism. It involves the deliberate use of words and images. Their objective is to destabilize reality, justify violence, and manipulate public perception.

We are left in a world where language itself becomes a battleground. Every word is loaded with political intent. Both sides use semantic weapons to control the narrative. Baudrillard warned us about this shift long ago: when reality is replaced by hyperreality, the truth itself becomes a casualty. The violence on the ground is horrific, but the battle for meaning—fought with words, symbols, and images—is just as devastating.

Moving Forward: Integrating Conflicting Narratives

We are caught in this ongoing war. The challenge is to navigate this fractured landscape. We must do this without losing sight of our own humanity. We are bombarded daily by conflicting narratives that demand our loyalty and condemn our doubts. Ultimately, the trauma is not just about rockets or the loss of life. It’s about the war over reality itself. In this war, words become weapons. Understanding transforms into a struggle.

For Further Reading

1. Denial and Distortion of the Hamas-led October 7 Attack
   The Anti-Defamation League (ADL) provides a comprehensive overview. They focus on misinformation and false narratives spread following the massacre.
   Read more here
2. “There are No Innocent People in Gaza.” These are statements by Israeli officials.
   Israeli Defense Minister Avigdor Lieberman and President Isaac Herzog analyzed rhetoric. They frame Gaza’s civilian population as complicit in the conflict.
   Jerusalem Post Coverage | Jordan News
3. Netanyahu’s “Total Victory” Speech Analysis
   Analysis of Netanyahu’s rhetoric and what it means for the ongoing conflict.
   Washington Post Summary | AP News Report
4. Baudrillard’s The Spirit of Terrorism
   This is an overview and analysis of Baudrillard’s thoughts. It discusses how terrorism operates symbolically. It also explains why it disrupts the modern order of meaning.
   Unearned Wisdom Summary | PopMatters Article