It’s interesting to see the leaps here. Mostly I’m talking about the good/bad framing being applied to yet another complex situation. I didn’t comment if there should be a Palestine—just that these kids don’t know what they’re fighting for or against. There are so many horrible injustices out there and I think there are a lot of reasons that this one turned into protest camping! The point here is the flattening, not to take a side in the hamas/israel battle.
Lisa, I think that the reason for the flattening is the tendency for protagonists in debates over the Israel/Palestine question to approach it from a framework of what we could call "identitarian solidarity", rather than attempting to analyse the issue in a normative political framework centering on principles of democracy, human rights, rights to national self-determination, etc.
This tendency has a long history. Writing about antisemitism in Great Britain in 1945, George Orwell noted that awareness of the Holocaust and of the long prior history of oppression of the Jews had caused respectable opinion in Great Britain to consider that the Jews simply had to be supported in any situation in which Jews were involved, with the consequence (among other things) that people thought Jewish claims in Palestine at the time had to be supported over Arab claims simply because they were the claims of the Jews, rather than because such a position was justified on the merits of the issue (Orwell acknowledged that a case could be made for Jewish claims on their merits). To use contemporary language, by the late 1940s the Jews had come to be regarded as an oppressed identity group, and as such had to be supported irrespective of the specifics of the issue in question - just as (for example) PoC and trans/nonbinary people are framed as oppressed identity groups today, and so (as we well know) the complexities of youth gender medicine are hacked and stretched by the usual suspects into the Procrustean bed of identitarian solidarity with "trans kids".
There was a time when the Left and progressives didn't simply default to identitarian solidarity, on these or other issues. In the early 1980s I was a member of a Marxist discussion group in Melbourne that included some prominent pro-Palestine solidarity activists. This group decided to analyse the "Jewish question" in terms of Marxist theories on the nation. It reached the conclusion that the Jews are a nation (and an historically oppressed one) and therefore had the right to national self-determination, and therefore went on to call for a two-state solution in Israel/Palestine. A not dissimilar line of argument was developed by the late Fred Halliday at about the same time, although Halliday's view was that it was the Israeli Jews specifically, rather than Jews in general, who were a nation with the right to self-determination that should be realised through a two-state solution. My point is not to defend, in 2024, the Melbourne discussion group or Fred Halliday on all the specifics of their arguments, but to remember that they and others on the Left tried to develop a position on the issue based on studying the facts of the issue and thinking about it in terms of universal (or at least universalisable) principles, rather than an identitarian "goodies/baddies" framing.
Fast forward to 2024, and progressives in the English-speaking world are essentially back to where "respectable opinion" in Great Britain was in 1945, except that it is now the Palestinians rather than the Jews who are framed as the oppressed identity group while the Jews are the oppressing ("white", "colonialist") identity group. And of course, within this framing, nothing bad can be said about the oppressed identity group, and nothing the oppressed identity group (or its purported leaders and impresarios) do on its behalf) should be criticised.
As I have already suggested, this is part of a more general retreat from democratic universalism by large parts of the contemporary Left.
Yikes! You're right that there wasn't a country called Palestine at the time of the establishment of the modern state of Israel (there was a British mandate called Palestine) but there also wasn't a country called Israel so .. Anyway there also wasn't a "country" called Cherokee or Ojibwe etc. but the forced removal and slaughter of indigenous peoples was still very bad. * More to the point however is that there are problems, NOW, currently with the way Palestinians (or not-Israeli, or not-Jewish, or whatever you want to say) living (now dying) in Gaza are denied freedom by the country (modern nation-state) of Israel. So maybe fix that rather than quibbling about whose great-great-x-400 grandfather roamed around 3,000 years ago and wrote a book saying No srsly God chose me for realsies.
All nations are historically formed, and the majority of nation-states in the world didn't exist two hundred years ago. The key point is that at the present time there are two living communities - the Palestinians and the Israeli Jews - who both meet the criteria to be considered nations with the right to self-determination. The challenge is to get to a point where the political-institutional framework/s exist to ensure that both nations enjoy that right.
Hey lovely, ever heard of Arab colonialism? Jewish people are indigenous to the region, and while the “story” is that there was a forced removal, the truth is much more complex. You might enjoy reading up on that 💜 imagine that the indigenous peoples of America return to their native lands. Now imagine everyone around them keeps starting wars to commit genocide against them and take their land…but the indigenous people hold them off…And also gain further territory that they now “rule”. Now imagine they give lots of it back to maintain peace between their neighbors! (Which btw is very rare in historical terms). Now imagine some of the neighbors agree to peace and are still peaceful today (Egypt, sort of), and other of the leaders of their neighbors use that land next door to build an entire civilization that is hell bent on killing the indigenous people.. (Gaza and others) while also completely refusing to build up a healthy life for their country that doesn’t involve hating and killing other people…if you can grasp all that you’ll be much closer to understanding 💜
But Jewish people are also indigenous to parts of Europe. Which is where the Holocaust happened, and yet the fix or apology from Europe to the Jews afterwards was to give them their own country... Somewhere else. (In other words, let's give them land that belongs to some Arabs we've colonized, since they have no power and don't matter to us anyway). So, I mean, I suppose Israel could also start settling land in Germany or Poland, where Jews were driven from their homes, using the same argument.
We can all go back and forth with analogies, abstractions, and generalizations. You hold one set of beliefs about the story. It is just that, a belief system. You get to have it. Insisting that it is the right one is no better than those who are opposing the Israeli state or the narrative of trans activists. The facts are a lot messier and nuanced than that. Lisa is one who advocates for nuance and curiosity about facts, not abstractions.
I could explain it to you in facts-no abstractions-yet I find that people who hold the belief that the Palestinians were indigenous and Israelis are colonizers are already so far from the truth and nuance that analogies that highlight the double standard are a useful tool. I understand that you disagree-with the facts. That’s alright.
Well, actually, they are BOTH indigenous to the area, along with others. Israeli Jews and Palestinians actually share a significant percentage of their lineage. So why, after Europe so kindly gifted the Palestinians homes and land to the Jews that Europe had just tortured and attempted to exterminate, are Jews given so many more rights than Palestinians in Israel? Why does Israel continue to support settlements that are illegal under international law and actually are eager to expand them? If two ethnic groups both come from the same area, then shouldn't they have equal rights to it? But the Netanyahu government is adamant that there will never be a two state solution, and they are also doing everything they can to make sure Palestinians are not even second class citizens, they are not citizens at all.
That is only one point in the complex story. We can remove that contention and still have plenty else to discuss. It sounds as if you dismiss all pro-palestinian arguments based on this one contention. You are focusing on one thing to justify delegitimizing those on the other side.
Oh yes, those of you pointing out the differences in wars are totally correct. Of course it's far more complex than race, and that, in theory, the US is putting money in the "right" place when it comes to Ukraine. The point of these hasty sentences is just that they are using that framing, which I borrowed. And see how annoying and simplistic that flattening is? So annoying that a lot of people think I actually have this narrow a view of these complex subjects. One thing I do believe: you have every right to protest, but not to destroy the library!
I love that you wrote this. Yes, it appears that subject got drowned out! Let me offer two small correctives: Lisa noted Ben Ryan’s WaPo oped on the Cass Review, aimed toward the APA. It was good to see that additional breakthrough in the MSM zone of silence on this. Also, DIAG, which Lisa also noted, has put out a call for action, this one aimed at the AAP, “to put pressure on them to acknowledge the Cass Review.” Here’s the call, should anyone want to join in and write a letter to the AAP: https://www.di-ag.org/so/a2Oz5tDwv?languageTag=en&cid=9b3f4078-2cb3-45e4-b185-72a7feae7f3b
I really appreciated your nuanced opening commentary, Lisa, and particularly this: “But their slogan reveals the extent to which third-wave feminism and critical race theory’s offering of intersectionality—a useful tool to move toward justice—has backfired.” J and I were talking about this very thing on our morning walk, on reading an excerpt of a long-form Hadley Freeman piece that I gather is now out in the Jewish Quarterly. It is sad to see how badly once-useful concepts get warped beyond recognition. Intersectionality, as one example, initially offered nuance and complexity that I found useful. Now, however, it has devolved down into the crudest possible form of Oppression Olympics.
I also appreciate that you highlighted this Substack piece on the protests, which I recommend to all here: https://open.substack.com/pub/persuasion1/p/dear-media-stop-taking-students-too?r=16541&utm_medium=ios Those of us who, in our effort to grasp what the h**l is happening on the sex and gender front, have had need to become educated on all manner of things, including stages of human development. We are therefore well aware that the prefrontal cortex, which regulates “executive function,” is not fully developed in humans until circa age 25. That needs to be borne in mind strongly when thinking about the protests.
Also, just out of personal experience, I offer this: I was a first-year student at the University of Chicago in 1968 and sat in in the admin building. Most of us had no idea what we were trying to accomplish beyond participating in something that seemed exciting and rebellious. Yes, Vietnam and the draft were absolutely important, real life issues. I remember all too well my friends waiting for their draft numbers, and I have friends and family members who fought in Vietnam, too. But our sit-in wasn’t aimed at the draft, and even if it had been, it was irrelevant to accomplishing anything worthwhile. It was a formative experience, but the chief lesson as I look back is that we ended up with Nixon in the White House. What is needed, and has been needed, are more adults in the room gently, but firmly, guiding young people to learn how to think and engage constructively in furtherance of their goals. I don’t see any of that in evidence right now.
As for Alejandra, whoa! It boggles the mind how well you are able to keep up with the weekly firehose of stuff. Gratitude.
Lisa, I am a little disappointed in your whataboutism when it comes to the protesters. I expected a little more nuance and critical thinking from you here. I imagine it is hard to separate oneself from what is going on. Yes, the students have a lot of inconsistent thinking. Yes, the weaponizing of intersectionality is infuriating. Yes, protests lack nuance and aren't about debate or discussion. They are a blunt instrument. Yes, young people are not generally the wisest of people. Why are people expecting them to have full rational thinking? They at the age we all were (atleast if we were young people who were curious about the world and paying attention)-- questioning everything, anger at "The system," wanting big grand change. Young people have been protesting for the last 50 years, this is nothing new. We give too much weight to these protests and what they portend. If leaders and officials gave them a wide buffer, they would have not swollen and escalated. But asking why they aren't protesting Ukraine is disingenuous. They are protesting our government's support for wanton destruction of whole families and communities whether is is justified by Oct 7 or not. Our government is already supporting Ukraine.
Your point about Ukraine is spot on. What's there to protest? If you're already against the Russian invasion, the US government is taking a good position.
I was disappointed at the dismissal of Palestine's right to exist as a country entailed in the (para)phrase "there was no country called Palestine before the state of Israel was established", as well as at the "and it would not be friendly to queers" comment that cinched Palestinians' right to solidarity from young people in the West who have adopted the tenets of queer theory without knowing what these entail, just as they adopt the Palestinian cause without knowing much of the history of the occupation, dehumanization, marginalization, or oppression of Palestinians. Because their blind adoption of this cause is not a reason to diss the cause, to question Palestine's right to exist or Palestinians' right to receive global solidarity. I mean, one can question any country's right to exist, really--but not the right of a people to not be slaughtered, to not have human rights, etc.
Palestine does have the right to exist as a country, what they don’t have the right to do is create an entire terror hub that is hell bent on committing genocide against their neighbors. Existence would be guaranteed if they had used all the resources towards bettering their own region instead of in hate, terrorism, and indoctrination of their people to kill Jews. If you understand the history you know that they have had countless chances. And even been barred from entering by their other Arab neighbors…because the citizens have been turned into tools of hatred.
Saying that Palestine has created an entire terror hub, Palestine as a nation, a people, and a project, is absurd. It's like saying the US deserved the 9/11 attacks because the US had destroyed Iraq and destabilized the Middle East with its policies. It was not the US that did any of this, it was the US government--and the people who died in 9/11 were people, individuals, human beings. US military, who trained the death squads in most Latin American countries, from Guatemala to Argentina, and who have violated the human rights of probably most countries on the planet at some point, are not the US people, either. The US people is so complex, so diverse, that saying that they believe this, hate that, do x, think y, is absurd. Give the Palestinians the same consideration: they are millions of individuals. Same thing goes for Israelis. Not every Israeli is Jewish, Jews are not the same thing as Israelis, Israeli supporters of the Israeli government are different from Israeli critics of the government, Orthodox Jews in Israel are anti-Zionist, etc.
You’ve chosen the work exclusively of anti-Zionists. Illan Pape in particular is considered extremely fringe by the vast majority of Jews and Israelis and many have suggested that his work should be discredited. There have been many bad actors and extremists both among Palestinians and Israelis over the last 100 years and most accounts of Israeli/Palestinian history are biased either in one direction or the other simply by focusing on the crimes of one side and neglecting the crimes of the other. All that to say, I will read one of the books you suggest if you read an account from the other perspective- maybe Righteous Victims, by Benny Morris, or listen to the podcast Unpacking Israeli History.
That Hasidic “waiting for the messiah” bug must be spreading to seculars. It’s good you’ve been inoculated by Benny.
Thank you. Now I know what happened to Norm Finkelstein, Peter Beinart, Max Blumenthal, Dr. Gabor Mate and his sons. They caught the anti-Zion disease.
These people in JVP and code pink must be very sick.
And, what happened to Norm Finkelstein and his type is that they “caught” today’s progressive discourse in which the world is divided according to the oppressed and the oppressor and Zionists are the ultimate oppressor. Zionists take all the blame in this worldview, despite the fact that Britain promised Israel to the Jews (when it wasn’t theirs to give), the Ottomans sold Palestinian land to Jewish immigrants, Arabs sold Palestinian land to Jewish immigrants, and Europe and the other Arab nations treated their Jewish minorities so poorly that Jews felt compelled to aggressively fight for their own nation. The blame for this awful situation should be shared, but nope: Jews are a great scapegoat for the West’s post-colonial guilt!
Fact: Jews owned just 6% of the land in 1948. Fact: Pre 1920, Arabs and Jews lived as brothers in the Middle East. Fact: Begin and Shamir are in the history books as murderous killers of innocents. Ben Gurion was no better. Google King David hotel bombing, Deir Yassin massacre, etc. You’ve transferred your hate for Germany onto the people of Palestine. Berlin should be New Jerusalem.
The Stanford neuroscientist Robert Sepolsky opens his book “Behave” with a heroic fantasy of capturing Hitler. Goyim have the same fantasy.
Your indoctrination will not help Israel. Like Schmully Boteach and Ben Shapiro, your defense of genocide only hurts your cause. Did you ever expect to see campus riots against Israel? Many are Jewish students who are not so indoctrinated. Tikkun Olam.
They’ll scapegoat Bibi and whitewash the genocide. His time is done. He’ll seek asylum in America within 2 years. But peace is a long ways off.
I not wasting my words for you, but for those who might be inclined to educate themselves. Check out young , Jewish, brilliant Katie Bogen on YouTube. She’s the future.
Excuse me? I know the history. You assuming that I don’t is as patronizing as you telling Lisa to “educate herself” instead of entertaining the possibility that she has used her critical thinking skills to come to a different conclusion than you. Equally patronizing is your assertion that the Jews and Arabs lived as brothers before the big bad Zionists arrived. Many Mizrahi Jews who have listened to their grandparents’ stories would beg to differ. Where did I say that I hate the people of Palestine or that I am defending genocide? I support a ceasefire and an end to the occupation and whatever-state solution would lead to the Israelis and the Palestinians killing each other less. I do object to the contention that Zionism is 100% to blame for the last 100+ years of fighting. Your sarcasm and rudeness sucks.
I think the more interesting thing to talk about when thinking about these protests and queer activism is whether young people will come to appreciate the values of free speech. I find it ironic that so many of them shut down certain speech as harmful and "traumatizing" while they are currently relying on principles of free speech that used to be held so dearly in the US. Are the police, universties, and pro-Israel activists now taking a page of the activists that speech is subjectively deemed "harmful " and "dangerous" must be shut down? Is it possible that the activism of the past decade has led to everyone on all sides undervaluing free speech? Might we see a resurgence of the free speech movements after this? I think a lot about Sarah Schulman's book, "Conflict is not Abuse." [From intimate relationships to global politics, Sarah Schulman observes a continuum: that inflated accusations of harm are used to avoid accountability.]
This is a very good point—and I whole-heartedly agree it could be the basis for a much more productive discussion. I think universities themselves have really dropped the ball—and worse—in what they are teaching students. I can only imagine how differently students might be responding to these issues right now if universities had modeled open, respectful discussion of differences and critical thinking to work through those differences.
I also think it would be helpful if students (and perhaps we all could use a refresher on this!) were taught, as free speech is not absolute, where the boundaries are. Good discussions could be had on time, manner, and place restrictions, as well as where protected speech ends and unprotected conduct begins. FIRE has good analysis and information on this, and Kate Parker (our wonderful previous in brief writer here) recently alerted of this statement, which I think very good, from Ben Sasse, President of the University of Florida:
"At the University of Florida, we have repeatedly, patiently explained two things to protesters: We will always defend your rights to free speech and free assembly—but if you cross the line on clearly prohibited activities, you will be thrown off campus and suspended. In Gainesville, that means a three-year prohibition from campus. That’s serious. We said it. We meant it. We enforced it. We wish we didn’t have to, but the students weighed the costs, made their decisions, and will own the consequences as adults. We’re a university, not a daycare. We don’t coddle emotions, we wrestle with ideas."
The pro Israel crowd is not against the idiotic protests,but the baring of Jewish students and teachers from attending class, the harassment of those students and teachers, and the calls of “from the river to the sea”-which is demanding the genocide of the Jewish people. Considering their history, I find it pretty reasonable. Sure, you can say whatever you want, but you are not entitled to bar others from public institutions and public places Simply based on their ethnicity..
I am not reading of anything where jewish students and teachers were barred from attending class--maybe in a few small cases which can be addressed. The cry "from the river to the sea" has been interpreted in many ways. The ADL pushes one narrative that it is genocide but many --including Jews--disagree. It is a political cry more than anything. Generalizing what is going on is not very productive or contributing to the safety of anyone. It just fuels more push-pull.
I’m sorry that you are so bold to speak while also not being fully aware of the situation. Yes, Jewish professors have had their access cards revoked. Yes, Jewish students have been violently attacked, and many have been harassed and barred by “protesters” from attending classes.
There is only one way to interpret that cry-it was and always has been a cry for genocide. Do your research on where that phrase came from and you will understand. At the end of the day, they are free to shout whatever hateful ignorant thing they please. What they are NOT free to do is harm other people, or bar them from entering public places because of their ethnicity.
Denying Jewish people the right to enter public spaces was the beginning of the Holocaust-so perhaps if you’d experienced that in your own lifetime you might be more inclined to understand WHY this can’t go on, and why this behavior demands harsh punishment. Let’s not be the citizens of Germany, Poland etc…let’s not demand the ones in danger just go along with the degradation of their rights.
Yes, certainly a social contagion, and based on a lies, misinformation and confusion. Lie #1-that Jewish people are white…not a one is…they are Jewish.. though some do have light skin…
"that’s white people killing white people, lower on the scale"... But how did Israel vs Palestine become a white vs non-white issue? Physically, many Israeli and Palestinians look about the same race. (Israeli are ethnically diverse, but let's say we are talking about what an average person pictures when we talk about Israeli). I am Jewish and 30 years ago Arab friends in college called me "cousin". :)
George Orwell famously said that freedom is the right to say that 2+2 = 5. If he was observing the current wave of campus protests and the way some university managements are responding, he might add a codicil that freedom is also the right to say 2+2 = 5 and suffer no worse penalty than failing the exam, without being arrested or expelled for misconduct.
Outside of the comments of other folks in this thread, one significant difference between the likely war crimes in Gaza and the likely war crimes in Ukraine is that in Ukraine the US is funding the victims of a larger, stronger neighbor, whereas the US is directly funding and providing a large proportion of the weapons used to cause the horrific conditions in Gaza. Another significant difference is that Ukrainian noncombatants are a much smaller proportion of the casualties than in Gaza, finally, the noncombatants in Ukraine have someplace to go, inside their territory, that is outside of the combat zone. There does not appear to be any place safe in Gaza, and there has been no guarantee offered by Isreal of noncombatants being allowed to return to their homes after hostilities are over.
It’s interesting to see the leaps here. Mostly I’m talking about the good/bad framing being applied to yet another complex situation. I didn’t comment if there should be a Palestine—just that these kids don’t know what they’re fighting for or against. There are so many horrible injustices out there and I think there are a lot of reasons that this one turned into protest camping! The point here is the flattening, not to take a side in the hamas/israel battle.
Lisa, I think that the reason for the flattening is the tendency for protagonists in debates over the Israel/Palestine question to approach it from a framework of what we could call "identitarian solidarity", rather than attempting to analyse the issue in a normative political framework centering on principles of democracy, human rights, rights to national self-determination, etc.
This tendency has a long history. Writing about antisemitism in Great Britain in 1945, George Orwell noted that awareness of the Holocaust and of the long prior history of oppression of the Jews had caused respectable opinion in Great Britain to consider that the Jews simply had to be supported in any situation in which Jews were involved, with the consequence (among other things) that people thought Jewish claims in Palestine at the time had to be supported over Arab claims simply because they were the claims of the Jews, rather than because such a position was justified on the merits of the issue (Orwell acknowledged that a case could be made for Jewish claims on their merits). To use contemporary language, by the late 1940s the Jews had come to be regarded as an oppressed identity group, and as such had to be supported irrespective of the specifics of the issue in question - just as (for example) PoC and trans/nonbinary people are framed as oppressed identity groups today, and so (as we well know) the complexities of youth gender medicine are hacked and stretched by the usual suspects into the Procrustean bed of identitarian solidarity with "trans kids".
There was a time when the Left and progressives didn't simply default to identitarian solidarity, on these or other issues. In the early 1980s I was a member of a Marxist discussion group in Melbourne that included some prominent pro-Palestine solidarity activists. This group decided to analyse the "Jewish question" in terms of Marxist theories on the nation. It reached the conclusion that the Jews are a nation (and an historically oppressed one) and therefore had the right to national self-determination, and therefore went on to call for a two-state solution in Israel/Palestine. A not dissimilar line of argument was developed by the late Fred Halliday at about the same time, although Halliday's view was that it was the Israeli Jews specifically, rather than Jews in general, who were a nation with the right to self-determination that should be realised through a two-state solution. My point is not to defend, in 2024, the Melbourne discussion group or Fred Halliday on all the specifics of their arguments, but to remember that they and others on the Left tried to develop a position on the issue based on studying the facts of the issue and thinking about it in terms of universal (or at least universalisable) principles, rather than an identitarian "goodies/baddies" framing.
Fast forward to 2024, and progressives in the English-speaking world are essentially back to where "respectable opinion" in Great Britain was in 1945, except that it is now the Palestinians rather than the Jews who are framed as the oppressed identity group while the Jews are the oppressing ("white", "colonialist") identity group. And of course, within this framing, nothing bad can be said about the oppressed identity group, and nothing the oppressed identity group (or its purported leaders and impresarios) do on its behalf) should be criticised.
As I have already suggested, this is part of a more general retreat from democratic universalism by large parts of the contemporary Left.
This is really thoughtful and well-stated. Thank you.
Yikes! You're right that there wasn't a country called Palestine at the time of the establishment of the modern state of Israel (there was a British mandate called Palestine) but there also wasn't a country called Israel so .. Anyway there also wasn't a "country" called Cherokee or Ojibwe etc. but the forced removal and slaughter of indigenous peoples was still very bad. * More to the point however is that there are problems, NOW, currently with the way Palestinians (or not-Israeli, or not-Jewish, or whatever you want to say) living (now dying) in Gaza are denied freedom by the country (modern nation-state) of Israel. So maybe fix that rather than quibbling about whose great-great-x-400 grandfather roamed around 3,000 years ago and wrote a book saying No srsly God chose me for realsies.
All nations are historically formed, and the majority of nation-states in the world didn't exist two hundred years ago. The key point is that at the present time there are two living communities - the Palestinians and the Israeli Jews - who both meet the criteria to be considered nations with the right to self-determination. The challenge is to get to a point where the political-institutional framework/s exist to ensure that both nations enjoy that right.
Hey lovely, ever heard of Arab colonialism? Jewish people are indigenous to the region, and while the “story” is that there was a forced removal, the truth is much more complex. You might enjoy reading up on that 💜 imagine that the indigenous peoples of America return to their native lands. Now imagine everyone around them keeps starting wars to commit genocide against them and take their land…but the indigenous people hold them off…And also gain further territory that they now “rule”. Now imagine they give lots of it back to maintain peace between their neighbors! (Which btw is very rare in historical terms). Now imagine some of the neighbors agree to peace and are still peaceful today (Egypt, sort of), and other of the leaders of their neighbors use that land next door to build an entire civilization that is hell bent on killing the indigenous people.. (Gaza and others) while also completely refusing to build up a healthy life for their country that doesn’t involve hating and killing other people…if you can grasp all that you’ll be much closer to understanding 💜
But Jewish people are also indigenous to parts of Europe. Which is where the Holocaust happened, and yet the fix or apology from Europe to the Jews afterwards was to give them their own country... Somewhere else. (In other words, let's give them land that belongs to some Arabs we've colonized, since they have no power and don't matter to us anyway). So, I mean, I suppose Israel could also start settling land in Germany or Poland, where Jews were driven from their homes, using the same argument.
We can all go back and forth with analogies, abstractions, and generalizations. You hold one set of beliefs about the story. It is just that, a belief system. You get to have it. Insisting that it is the right one is no better than those who are opposing the Israeli state or the narrative of trans activists. The facts are a lot messier and nuanced than that. Lisa is one who advocates for nuance and curiosity about facts, not abstractions.
I could explain it to you in facts-no abstractions-yet I find that people who hold the belief that the Palestinians were indigenous and Israelis are colonizers are already so far from the truth and nuance that analogies that highlight the double standard are a useful tool. I understand that you disagree-with the facts. That’s alright.
Well, actually, they are BOTH indigenous to the area, along with others. Israeli Jews and Palestinians actually share a significant percentage of their lineage. So why, after Europe so kindly gifted the Palestinians homes and land to the Jews that Europe had just tortured and attempted to exterminate, are Jews given so many more rights than Palestinians in Israel? Why does Israel continue to support settlements that are illegal under international law and actually are eager to expand them? If two ethnic groups both come from the same area, then shouldn't they have equal rights to it? But the Netanyahu government is adamant that there will never be a two state solution, and they are also doing everything they can to make sure Palestinians are not even second class citizens, they are not citizens at all.
That is only one point in the complex story. We can remove that contention and still have plenty else to discuss. It sounds as if you dismiss all pro-palestinian arguments based on this one contention. You are focusing on one thing to justify delegitimizing those on the other side.
Oh yes, those of you pointing out the differences in wars are totally correct. Of course it's far more complex than race, and that, in theory, the US is putting money in the "right" place when it comes to Ukraine. The point of these hasty sentences is just that they are using that framing, which I borrowed. And see how annoying and simplistic that flattening is? So annoying that a lot of people think I actually have this narrow a view of these complex subjects. One thing I do believe: you have every right to protest, but not to destroy the library!
Does anyone want to make a comment about gender issues?
I love that you wrote this. Yes, it appears that subject got drowned out! Let me offer two small correctives: Lisa noted Ben Ryan’s WaPo oped on the Cass Review, aimed toward the APA. It was good to see that additional breakthrough in the MSM zone of silence on this. Also, DIAG, which Lisa also noted, has put out a call for action, this one aimed at the AAP, “to put pressure on them to acknowledge the Cass Review.” Here’s the call, should anyone want to join in and write a letter to the AAP: https://www.di-ag.org/so/a2Oz5tDwv?languageTag=en&cid=9b3f4078-2cb3-45e4-b185-72a7feae7f3b
I really appreciated your nuanced opening commentary, Lisa, and particularly this: “But their slogan reveals the extent to which third-wave feminism and critical race theory’s offering of intersectionality—a useful tool to move toward justice—has backfired.” J and I were talking about this very thing on our morning walk, on reading an excerpt of a long-form Hadley Freeman piece that I gather is now out in the Jewish Quarterly. It is sad to see how badly once-useful concepts get warped beyond recognition. Intersectionality, as one example, initially offered nuance and complexity that I found useful. Now, however, it has devolved down into the crudest possible form of Oppression Olympics.
I also appreciate that you highlighted this Substack piece on the protests, which I recommend to all here: https://open.substack.com/pub/persuasion1/p/dear-media-stop-taking-students-too?r=16541&utm_medium=ios Those of us who, in our effort to grasp what the h**l is happening on the sex and gender front, have had need to become educated on all manner of things, including stages of human development. We are therefore well aware that the prefrontal cortex, which regulates “executive function,” is not fully developed in humans until circa age 25. That needs to be borne in mind strongly when thinking about the protests.
Also, just out of personal experience, I offer this: I was a first-year student at the University of Chicago in 1968 and sat in in the admin building. Most of us had no idea what we were trying to accomplish beyond participating in something that seemed exciting and rebellious. Yes, Vietnam and the draft were absolutely important, real life issues. I remember all too well my friends waiting for their draft numbers, and I have friends and family members who fought in Vietnam, too. But our sit-in wasn’t aimed at the draft, and even if it had been, it was irrelevant to accomplishing anything worthwhile. It was a formative experience, but the chief lesson as I look back is that we ended up with Nixon in the White House. What is needed, and has been needed, are more adults in the room gently, but firmly, guiding young people to learn how to think and engage constructively in furtherance of their goals. I don’t see any of that in evidence right now.
As for Alejandra, whoa! It boggles the mind how well you are able to keep up with the weekly firehose of stuff. Gratitude.
Lisa, I am a little disappointed in your whataboutism when it comes to the protesters. I expected a little more nuance and critical thinking from you here. I imagine it is hard to separate oneself from what is going on. Yes, the students have a lot of inconsistent thinking. Yes, the weaponizing of intersectionality is infuriating. Yes, protests lack nuance and aren't about debate or discussion. They are a blunt instrument. Yes, young people are not generally the wisest of people. Why are people expecting them to have full rational thinking? They at the age we all were (atleast if we were young people who were curious about the world and paying attention)-- questioning everything, anger at "The system," wanting big grand change. Young people have been protesting for the last 50 years, this is nothing new. We give too much weight to these protests and what they portend. If leaders and officials gave them a wide buffer, they would have not swollen and escalated. But asking why they aren't protesting Ukraine is disingenuous. They are protesting our government's support for wanton destruction of whole families and communities whether is is justified by Oct 7 or not. Our government is already supporting Ukraine.
Your point about Ukraine is spot on. What's there to protest? If you're already against the Russian invasion, the US government is taking a good position.
Thank You! Your briefs are always chock full of news I don't see anywhere else.
I was disappointed at the dismissal of Palestine's right to exist as a country entailed in the (para)phrase "there was no country called Palestine before the state of Israel was established", as well as at the "and it would not be friendly to queers" comment that cinched Palestinians' right to solidarity from young people in the West who have adopted the tenets of queer theory without knowing what these entail, just as they adopt the Palestinian cause without knowing much of the history of the occupation, dehumanization, marginalization, or oppression of Palestinians. Because their blind adoption of this cause is not a reason to diss the cause, to question Palestine's right to exist or Palestinians' right to receive global solidarity. I mean, one can question any country's right to exist, really--but not the right of a people to not be slaughtered, to not have human rights, etc.
Palestine does have the right to exist as a country, what they don’t have the right to do is create an entire terror hub that is hell bent on committing genocide against their neighbors. Existence would be guaranteed if they had used all the resources towards bettering their own region instead of in hate, terrorism, and indoctrination of their people to kill Jews. If you understand the history you know that they have had countless chances. And even been barred from entering by their other Arab neighbors…because the citizens have been turned into tools of hatred.
Saying that Palestine has created an entire terror hub, Palestine as a nation, a people, and a project, is absurd. It's like saying the US deserved the 9/11 attacks because the US had destroyed Iraq and destabilized the Middle East with its policies. It was not the US that did any of this, it was the US government--and the people who died in 9/11 were people, individuals, human beings. US military, who trained the death squads in most Latin American countries, from Guatemala to Argentina, and who have violated the human rights of probably most countries on the planet at some point, are not the US people, either. The US people is so complex, so diverse, that saying that they believe this, hate that, do x, think y, is absurd. Give the Palestinians the same consideration: they are millions of individuals. Same thing goes for Israelis. Not every Israeli is Jewish, Jews are not the same thing as Israelis, Israeli supporters of the Israeli government are different from Israeli critics of the government, Orthodox Jews in Israel are anti-Zionist, etc.
Gain some insight:
“The General’s son,” by Miko Peled;”
“The Ethnic Cleansing of Palestine;” by Israeli historian Illan Pape;”
“100 years of Palestine;” by Rashid Khalidi (Columbia U. Professor)
If you can’t read, all 3 authors are alive and well
on YouTube. Watch their interviews with Sam Seder or Katie Halper (both Jewish).
I’d also recommend watching New York Rabbi Yaakov Shapiro’s interviews regarding Judaism versus Zionism.
Cognitive Dissonance is hard to overcome when one’s sense of sense of self, or “identity,” (as the gender cultists like to say) is at stake.
Thanks, Lisa, for all your hard work from a ROGD dad. My daughter is 20 and desisted.
You’ve chosen the work exclusively of anti-Zionists. Illan Pape in particular is considered extremely fringe by the vast majority of Jews and Israelis and many have suggested that his work should be discredited. There have been many bad actors and extremists both among Palestinians and Israelis over the last 100 years and most accounts of Israeli/Palestinian history are biased either in one direction or the other simply by focusing on the crimes of one side and neglecting the crimes of the other. All that to say, I will read one of the books you suggest if you read an account from the other perspective- maybe Righteous Victims, by Benny Morris, or listen to the podcast Unpacking Israeli History.
OMG! They’re anti-Zionist?!
That Hasidic “waiting for the messiah” bug must be spreading to seculars. It’s good you’ve been inoculated by Benny.
Thank you. Now I know what happened to Norm Finkelstein, Peter Beinart, Max Blumenthal, Dr. Gabor Mate and his sons. They caught the anti-Zion disease.
These people in JVP and code pink must be very sick.
So, I’ll take that as a “no.”
And, what happened to Norm Finkelstein and his type is that they “caught” today’s progressive discourse in which the world is divided according to the oppressed and the oppressor and Zionists are the ultimate oppressor. Zionists take all the blame in this worldview, despite the fact that Britain promised Israel to the Jews (when it wasn’t theirs to give), the Ottomans sold Palestinian land to Jewish immigrants, Arabs sold Palestinian land to Jewish immigrants, and Europe and the other Arab nations treated their Jewish minorities so poorly that Jews felt compelled to aggressively fight for their own nation. The blame for this awful situation should be shared, but nope: Jews are a great scapegoat for the West’s post-colonial guilt!
Thank u for the chance to state:
Fact: Jews owned just 6% of the land in 1948. Fact: Pre 1920, Arabs and Jews lived as brothers in the Middle East. Fact: Begin and Shamir are in the history books as murderous killers of innocents. Ben Gurion was no better. Google King David hotel bombing, Deir Yassin massacre, etc. You’ve transferred your hate for Germany onto the people of Palestine. Berlin should be New Jerusalem.
The Stanford neuroscientist Robert Sepolsky opens his book “Behave” with a heroic fantasy of capturing Hitler. Goyim have the same fantasy.
Your indoctrination will not help Israel. Like Schmully Boteach and Ben Shapiro, your defense of genocide only hurts your cause. Did you ever expect to see campus riots against Israel? Many are Jewish students who are not so indoctrinated. Tikkun Olam.
They’ll scapegoat Bibi and whitewash the genocide. His time is done. He’ll seek asylum in America within 2 years. But peace is a long ways off.
I not wasting my words for you, but for those who might be inclined to educate themselves. Check out young , Jewish, brilliant Katie Bogen on YouTube. She’s the future.
Excuse me? I know the history. You assuming that I don’t is as patronizing as you telling Lisa to “educate herself” instead of entertaining the possibility that she has used her critical thinking skills to come to a different conclusion than you. Equally patronizing is your assertion that the Jews and Arabs lived as brothers before the big bad Zionists arrived. Many Mizrahi Jews who have listened to their grandparents’ stories would beg to differ. Where did I say that I hate the people of Palestine or that I am defending genocide? I support a ceasefire and an end to the occupation and whatever-state solution would lead to the Israelis and the Palestinians killing each other less. I do object to the contention that Zionism is 100% to blame for the last 100+ years of fighting. Your sarcasm and rudeness sucks.
I just watched Matt Lieb’s “Bad Hasbara” podcast featuring mizrahi activist Hadar Cohen.
You really know your Mizrahi. Guess you win.
This!--- Cognitive Dissonance is hard to overcome when one’s sense of sense of self, or “identity,” (as the gender cultists like to say) is at stake.
I think the more interesting thing to talk about when thinking about these protests and queer activism is whether young people will come to appreciate the values of free speech. I find it ironic that so many of them shut down certain speech as harmful and "traumatizing" while they are currently relying on principles of free speech that used to be held so dearly in the US. Are the police, universties, and pro-Israel activists now taking a page of the activists that speech is subjectively deemed "harmful " and "dangerous" must be shut down? Is it possible that the activism of the past decade has led to everyone on all sides undervaluing free speech? Might we see a resurgence of the free speech movements after this? I think a lot about Sarah Schulman's book, "Conflict is not Abuse." [From intimate relationships to global politics, Sarah Schulman observes a continuum: that inflated accusations of harm are used to avoid accountability.]
This is a very good point—and I whole-heartedly agree it could be the basis for a much more productive discussion. I think universities themselves have really dropped the ball—and worse—in what they are teaching students. I can only imagine how differently students might be responding to these issues right now if universities had modeled open, respectful discussion of differences and critical thinking to work through those differences.
I also think it would be helpful if students (and perhaps we all could use a refresher on this!) were taught, as free speech is not absolute, where the boundaries are. Good discussions could be had on time, manner, and place restrictions, as well as where protected speech ends and unprotected conduct begins. FIRE has good analysis and information on this, and Kate Parker (our wonderful previous in brief writer here) recently alerted of this statement, which I think very good, from Ben Sasse, President of the University of Florida:
"At the University of Florida, we have repeatedly, patiently explained two things to protesters: We will always defend your rights to free speech and free assembly—but if you cross the line on clearly prohibited activities, you will be thrown off campus and suspended. In Gainesville, that means a three-year prohibition from campus. That’s serious. We said it. We meant it. We enforced it. We wish we didn’t have to, but the students weighed the costs, made their decisions, and will own the consequences as adults. We’re a university, not a daycare. We don’t coddle emotions, we wrestle with ideas."
The pro Israel crowd is not against the idiotic protests,but the baring of Jewish students and teachers from attending class, the harassment of those students and teachers, and the calls of “from the river to the sea”-which is demanding the genocide of the Jewish people. Considering their history, I find it pretty reasonable. Sure, you can say whatever you want, but you are not entitled to bar others from public institutions and public places Simply based on their ethnicity..
I am not reading of anything where jewish students and teachers were barred from attending class--maybe in a few small cases which can be addressed. The cry "from the river to the sea" has been interpreted in many ways. The ADL pushes one narrative that it is genocide but many --including Jews--disagree. It is a political cry more than anything. Generalizing what is going on is not very productive or contributing to the safety of anyone. It just fuels more push-pull.
I’m sorry that you are so bold to speak while also not being fully aware of the situation. Yes, Jewish professors have had their access cards revoked. Yes, Jewish students have been violently attacked, and many have been harassed and barred by “protesters” from attending classes.
There is only one way to interpret that cry-it was and always has been a cry for genocide. Do your research on where that phrase came from and you will understand. At the end of the day, they are free to shout whatever hateful ignorant thing they please. What they are NOT free to do is harm other people, or bar them from entering public places because of their ethnicity.
Denying Jewish people the right to enter public spaces was the beginning of the Holocaust-so perhaps if you’d experienced that in your own lifetime you might be more inclined to understand WHY this can’t go on, and why this behavior demands harsh punishment. Let’s not be the citizens of Germany, Poland etc…let’s not demand the ones in danger just go along with the degradation of their rights.
For those who are not subscribers to the WA post, here is the new WA Post op ed in archive form:
https://archive.ph/zeqNv
Thank you! I was perusing the comments specifically looking for this!
Oops! That link didn't work for me.
Yes, certainly a social contagion, and based on a lies, misinformation and confusion. Lie #1-that Jewish people are white…not a one is…they are Jewish.. though some do have light skin…
"that’s white people killing white people, lower on the scale"... But how did Israel vs Palestine become a white vs non-white issue? Physically, many Israeli and Palestinians look about the same race. (Israeli are ethnically diverse, but let's say we are talking about what an average person pictures when we talk about Israeli). I am Jewish and 30 years ago Arab friends in college called me "cousin". :)
George Orwell famously said that freedom is the right to say that 2+2 = 5. If he was observing the current wave of campus protests and the way some university managements are responding, he might add a codicil that freedom is also the right to say 2+2 = 5 and suffer no worse penalty than failing the exam, without being arrested or expelled for misconduct.
Outside of the comments of other folks in this thread, one significant difference between the likely war crimes in Gaza and the likely war crimes in Ukraine is that in Ukraine the US is funding the victims of a larger, stronger neighbor, whereas the US is directly funding and providing a large proportion of the weapons used to cause the horrific conditions in Gaza. Another significant difference is that Ukrainian noncombatants are a much smaller proportion of the casualties than in Gaza, finally, the noncombatants in Ukraine have someplace to go, inside their territory, that is outside of the combat zone. There does not appear to be any place safe in Gaza, and there has been no guarantee offered by Isreal of noncombatants being allowed to return to their homes after hostilities are over.
It seems university professors need to teach a little history as well. This is a student protestor at NYU, explaining how the Democratic People's Republic of Korea (DPRK) are good guys: https://video.twimg.com/ext_tw_video/1787094650202853376/pu/vid/avc1/720x900/VlxG6rZlAb4Y30oI.mp4?tag=12