Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.25 AVERAGE
4.25 AVERAGE
Really important AND sort of repetitive - it felt like the editor could have left out spots where both Chomsky and Pappé say the same sentences in the same ways multiple times.
informative
reflective
medium-paced
informative
sad
medium-paced
challenging
informative
medium-paced
Collated in the context of the 2014 Operation Protective Edge, this collection of interviews & essays highlights the 100 year + cycle of repression, violence, and displacement Palestinians face at the hands of Israel, while also sharing solutions which I believe apply to our current moment.
Free Palestine.
Free Palestine.
informative
reflective
medium-paced
challenging
informative
sad
fast-paced
"The Palestine question is emblematic of what is wrong with the world. The
role played by Western states, the complicity of corporations and of various
institutions make this case a very special one. The fact that Israel actually
benefits from violating international law and receives “red carpet” treatment
from the West means that we all have a role to play in ending the injustice that
the Palestinians are facing. The injustice in Palestine has ramifications
throughout the world."
"And Palestine is a great laboratory. Exploring the Palestine
case is therefore crucial for understanding where we stand as human beings and
what we stand for. Finding a solution to this question could then open the door to
a new vision, to a new world, to new possibilities for all of us."
"The last paradox is that the tale of Palestine from the beginning until today is
a simple story of colonialism and dispossession, yet the world treats it as a
multifaceted and complex story—hard to understand and even harder to solve.
Indeed, the story of Palestine has been told before: European settlers coming to a
foreign land, settling there, and either committing genocide against or expelling
the indigenous people. The Zionists have not invented anything new in this
respect. But Israel succeeded nonetheless, with the help of its allies everywhere,
in building a multilayered explanation that is so complex that only Israel can
understand it. Any interference from the outside world is immediately castigated
as naïve at best or anti-Semitic at worst."
"Israel boasts of its humanitarianism by telling the world that it
admitted dozens of wounded Syrian fighters to its hospitals. But Syria’s four
neighbors, who have no less complicated relationships with Syria, absorbed
hundreds of thousands of refugees."
"To forget about the past means forgetting about the future because the
past involves aspirations, hopes, many of them entirely justified, that will be
dealt with in the future if you pay attention to them. It’s essentially saying,
“Let’s dismiss just hopes and aspirations because we’ve got what we want"."
"President Obama says: “Well let’s forget
about the crimes that were committed, the invasion of Iraq, let’s just go on.” In
others words, let’s continue the same way we’ve been proceeding. That’s the
weapon of the powerful."
"Because most of what is interpreted today as Zionism
violates, and contradicts, basic human rights and civil rights for anyone who is
not a Jew in Israel."
"What is the price paid by this transformation and
who pays the price? If this new definition comes at the expense of another
people, this becomes a problem. If a group is a victim of a crime and is looking
for a safe haven, it cannot obtain this by expelling someone else, another group,
from this space that you want as your safe haven. This is the difference between
what you want as a group and what means you use to achieve it."
"There is a book in
1935 (by Joachim Prinz, Wir Juden). This is a humanist Zionist who said that
Jews should recognize that they should be sympathetic to the Nazis because they
have the same kind of ideology we do. Blood and land and so on. We agree with
that, if we can only explain to them that we are really on the same side, they will
stop persecuting us."
"As I’ve said before, states have no
inherent legitimacy. They have all been imposed by violence, they are causing
violence all over the world. It’s an inhuman social structure. It should erode
every time. In that context I think you could imagine an authentic return. Not
just recognition of an historical wrong, but in fact interactions among people that
are not based on states or religious or ethnic lines. There are other grounds for
people to interact with one another."
"In 1971 Israel made a decision, which in my view was its most fateful
decision in its history. There was an offer from Egypt for a full peace treaty. The
Israeli government, led by Golda Meir, considered it and rejected it because they
wanted to colonize the Sinai."
"The scenes for example
during Cast Lead, the brutal attack on Gaza with Israelis sitting on beach chairs
on the hills, applauding every time a bomb fell."
"About 92
percent of the land was in the hands of Keren Kayemet, the Jewish National
Fund, which is an organization that had contracts with the state of Israel that
required them to work only for the benefit of “people of Jewish race/religion and
origin” (that was the phrase) that with the whole array of administrative
arrangements, bureaucratic structures meant that in effect they control over 90
percent of the land—which meant that it was Arab-free basically."
"L’atteggiamento della
comunità internazionale ricorda quella vecchia storiella ebraica del tizio che
cerca la chiave non dove l’ha persa, ma dove c’è più luce."
"Quanto a noi, abbiamo sempre
vissuto come in una bolla, non sapevamo che esistesse una realtà diversa. Non è
stato facile fuggire da quella bolla."
"Se però l’obiettivo era
la secolarizzazione della religione ebraica, non si poteva poi ricorrere alla Bibbia
per giustificare l’occupazione della Palestina; uno strano guazzabuglio, che a me
piace definire come “un movimento di persone che non credono in Dio ma a cui
Dio ha promesso la Palestina”."
"Come ho già detto, ciò scaturisce dal modo razionalista, tipicamente
occidentale, di concepire la realtà. In base a questo criterio, si può appoggiare
soltanto ciò che è concretamente realizzabile, non ciò a cui si aspira realmente:
poiché in questo momento storico il consenso mondiale propende per la
soluzione a due Stati, bisogna orientarsi in quella direzione."
"Negli Stati Uniti è in corso un dibattito. L’estrema destra, che in un certo
senso si chiama fuori dall’arco politico internazionale, è contraria all’attacco,
anche se per ragioni che a me non piacciono. Si oppone perché non vuole
sprecare le risorse americane per risolvere i problemi degli altri."
"Tradotto, significa che autorizza gli USA e la NATO a esercitare la
violenza dovunque vogliono senza l’autorizzazione del Consiglio di Sicurezza.
Questo è il significato del “dovere di proteggere” nel lessico occidentale. Se non
fosse tragico, sarebbe comico."
"La causa primaria di tutto questo è l’occupazione criminale di Gaza e le
politiche pensate deliberatamente per ridurre la vita dei palestinesi a mera
sopravvivenza, mentre in Cisgiordania la popolazione è confinata in cantoni
invivibili e Israele si prende tutta la terra che vuole, in totale spregio del diritto
internazionale e delle esplicite disposizioni del Consiglio di Sicurezza, oltre che,
ovviamente, della decenza. Israele continuerà a comportarsi così fino a quando
ci sarà Washington ad aiutarlo e l’Europa a tollerare la situazione, per nostra
eterna vergogna."
"Occorre insistere sul contesto, a maggior ragione perché la macchina
propagandistica israeliana tende sempre a spiegare le sue politiche
decontestualizzandole e adopera lo stesso pretesto delle precedenti devastazioni
per giustificare ogni nuovo massacro compiuto nei campi di sterminio della
Palestina."
"Il rapimento e l’assassinio dei tre ragazzi hanno fornito anche l’appiglio per
realizzare il vecchio sogno di spazzare via Hamas da Gaza, in modo da far stare
di nuovo tranquillo il ghetto."
"La copertura distorta dell’offensiva israeliana sulla stampa è dovuta anche
alla percezione, ormai diffusa tra i giornalisti occidentali, che le vicende di Gaza
siano nulla in confronto alle atrocità in Iraq e in Siria."
"In Cisgiordania, la norma è che Israele costruisca illegalmente nuovi
insediamenti e infrastrutture in modo da inglobare tutto quello che ritiene di
valore, condannando così i palestinesi a rimanere in cantoni invivibili e a subire
repressioni e violenze.
A Gaza, invece, la norma è un’esistenza miserabile in un crudele e devastante
stadio d’assedio, gestito da Israele in modo da garantire la mera sopravvivenza e
nulla più."
"Gli esperti israeliani, grazie al loro famoso
efficientismo, davvero calcolarono con precisione le calorie giornaliere
necessarie agli abitanti di Gaza per sopravvivere, mentre intanto li si privava di
medicine, materiali edili e altre cose indispensabili per costruirsi una vita
dignitosa. Le forze militari israeliane li confinarono – via aria, mare e terra – in
quello che il premier britannico David Cameron ha giustamente definito un
campo di prigionia."
"USA e Israele pianificarono immediatamente un
golpe militare per rovesciare il governo regolarmente eletto. E quando Hamas
ebbe l’impudenza di sventare quel piano, gli attacchi e l’assedio israeliani
divennero ancora più spietati."
"I funzionari israeliani elogiano l’umanità di quello che definiscono
«l’esercito più etico al mondo», perché informa i residenti che le loro case
saranno bombardate."
"Gli Stati Uniti decisero
all’istante, insieme con Israele, di punire i palestinesi per aver votato male: fu
imposto un severo stato d’assedio e altre punizioni di vario genere, la violenza
aumentò e gli USA cominciarono subito a progettare un golpe militare per
rovesciare quel governo inaccettabile. Del resto è una pratica già nota, non c’è
bisogno di enumerarne gli infiniti esempi storici. L’Unione Europea,
colpevolmente e a suo discredito, stette al gioco. Immediatamente scattò
l’offensiva israeliana; quella fu la fine dell’accordo di novembre, seguita da una
serie di attacchi da parte di Israele."
"Come qualunque diplomatico sa, quella è la frase tipica di chi è coinvolto in
gravi crimini: «Dimentichiamo il passato, pensiamo invece a un futuro
glorioso»."
"Gli israeliani
hanno dichiarato che pensavano fossero ancora vivi e per questo avevano
avviato un’operazione in Cisgiordania durata diverse settimane, nella speranza, a
loro dire, di trovarli ancora vivi. Intanto, arresti, aggressioni e tutto il resto. Poi è
venuto fuori che gli israeliani sapevano fin dall’inizio che i ragazzi erano stati
uccisi, e sapevano anche che con ogni probabilità Hamas non era coinvolto. Il
governo ha dichiarato che le informazioni in suo possesso indicavano un
coinvolgimento di Hamas; eppure finanche i loro analisti più esperti (tra cui
Shlomi Eldar) avevano detto immediatamente che il rapimento e l’omicidio –
reati orribili, non v’è dubbio – erano stati sicuramente opera di un clan
dissidente, il Qawasameh di Hebron, a cui Hamas non aveva dato il via libera e
che rappresenta anzi una spina nel fianco per la formazione palestinese."
role played by Western states, the complicity of corporations and of various
institutions make this case a very special one. The fact that Israel actually
benefits from violating international law and receives “red carpet” treatment
from the West means that we all have a role to play in ending the injustice that
the Palestinians are facing. The injustice in Palestine has ramifications
throughout the world."
"And Palestine is a great laboratory. Exploring the Palestine
case is therefore crucial for understanding where we stand as human beings and
what we stand for. Finding a solution to this question could then open the door to
a new vision, to a new world, to new possibilities for all of us."
"The last paradox is that the tale of Palestine from the beginning until today is
a simple story of colonialism and dispossession, yet the world treats it as a
multifaceted and complex story—hard to understand and even harder to solve.
Indeed, the story of Palestine has been told before: European settlers coming to a
foreign land, settling there, and either committing genocide against or expelling
the indigenous people. The Zionists have not invented anything new in this
respect. But Israel succeeded nonetheless, with the help of its allies everywhere,
in building a multilayered explanation that is so complex that only Israel can
understand it. Any interference from the outside world is immediately castigated
as naïve at best or anti-Semitic at worst."
"Israel boasts of its humanitarianism by telling the world that it
admitted dozens of wounded Syrian fighters to its hospitals. But Syria’s four
neighbors, who have no less complicated relationships with Syria, absorbed
hundreds of thousands of refugees."
"To forget about the past means forgetting about the future because the
past involves aspirations, hopes, many of them entirely justified, that will be
dealt with in the future if you pay attention to them. It’s essentially saying,
“Let’s dismiss just hopes and aspirations because we’ve got what we want"."
"President Obama says: “Well let’s forget
about the crimes that were committed, the invasion of Iraq, let’s just go on.” In
others words, let’s continue the same way we’ve been proceeding. That’s the
weapon of the powerful."
"Because most of what is interpreted today as Zionism
violates, and contradicts, basic human rights and civil rights for anyone who is
not a Jew in Israel."
"What is the price paid by this transformation and
who pays the price? If this new definition comes at the expense of another
people, this becomes a problem. If a group is a victim of a crime and is looking
for a safe haven, it cannot obtain this by expelling someone else, another group,
from this space that you want as your safe haven. This is the difference between
what you want as a group and what means you use to achieve it."
"There is a book in
1935 (by Joachim Prinz, Wir Juden). This is a humanist Zionist who said that
Jews should recognize that they should be sympathetic to the Nazis because they
have the same kind of ideology we do. Blood and land and so on. We agree with
that, if we can only explain to them that we are really on the same side, they will
stop persecuting us."
"As I’ve said before, states have no
inherent legitimacy. They have all been imposed by violence, they are causing
violence all over the world. It’s an inhuman social structure. It should erode
every time. In that context I think you could imagine an authentic return. Not
just recognition of an historical wrong, but in fact interactions among people that
are not based on states or religious or ethnic lines. There are other grounds for
people to interact with one another."
"In 1971 Israel made a decision, which in my view was its most fateful
decision in its history. There was an offer from Egypt for a full peace treaty. The
Israeli government, led by Golda Meir, considered it and rejected it because they
wanted to colonize the Sinai."
"The scenes for example
during Cast Lead, the brutal attack on Gaza with Israelis sitting on beach chairs
on the hills, applauding every time a bomb fell."
"About 92
percent of the land was in the hands of Keren Kayemet, the Jewish National
Fund, which is an organization that had contracts with the state of Israel that
required them to work only for the benefit of “people of Jewish race/religion and
origin” (that was the phrase) that with the whole array of administrative
arrangements, bureaucratic structures meant that in effect they control over 90
percent of the land—which meant that it was Arab-free basically."
"L’atteggiamento della
comunità internazionale ricorda quella vecchia storiella ebraica del tizio che
cerca la chiave non dove l’ha persa, ma dove c’è più luce."
"Quanto a noi, abbiamo sempre
vissuto come in una bolla, non sapevamo che esistesse una realtà diversa. Non è
stato facile fuggire da quella bolla."
"Se però l’obiettivo era
la secolarizzazione della religione ebraica, non si poteva poi ricorrere alla Bibbia
per giustificare l’occupazione della Palestina; uno strano guazzabuglio, che a me
piace definire come “un movimento di persone che non credono in Dio ma a cui
Dio ha promesso la Palestina”."
"Come ho già detto, ciò scaturisce dal modo razionalista, tipicamente
occidentale, di concepire la realtà. In base a questo criterio, si può appoggiare
soltanto ciò che è concretamente realizzabile, non ciò a cui si aspira realmente:
poiché in questo momento storico il consenso mondiale propende per la
soluzione a due Stati, bisogna orientarsi in quella direzione."
"Negli Stati Uniti è in corso un dibattito. L’estrema destra, che in un certo
senso si chiama fuori dall’arco politico internazionale, è contraria all’attacco,
anche se per ragioni che a me non piacciono. Si oppone perché non vuole
sprecare le risorse americane per risolvere i problemi degli altri."
"Tradotto, significa che autorizza gli USA e la NATO a esercitare la
violenza dovunque vogliono senza l’autorizzazione del Consiglio di Sicurezza.
Questo è il significato del “dovere di proteggere” nel lessico occidentale. Se non
fosse tragico, sarebbe comico."
"La causa primaria di tutto questo è l’occupazione criminale di Gaza e le
politiche pensate deliberatamente per ridurre la vita dei palestinesi a mera
sopravvivenza, mentre in Cisgiordania la popolazione è confinata in cantoni
invivibili e Israele si prende tutta la terra che vuole, in totale spregio del diritto
internazionale e delle esplicite disposizioni del Consiglio di Sicurezza, oltre che,
ovviamente, della decenza. Israele continuerà a comportarsi così fino a quando
ci sarà Washington ad aiutarlo e l’Europa a tollerare la situazione, per nostra
eterna vergogna."
"Occorre insistere sul contesto, a maggior ragione perché la macchina
propagandistica israeliana tende sempre a spiegare le sue politiche
decontestualizzandole e adopera lo stesso pretesto delle precedenti devastazioni
per giustificare ogni nuovo massacro compiuto nei campi di sterminio della
Palestina."
"Il rapimento e l’assassinio dei tre ragazzi hanno fornito anche l’appiglio per
realizzare il vecchio sogno di spazzare via Hamas da Gaza, in modo da far stare
di nuovo tranquillo il ghetto."
"La copertura distorta dell’offensiva israeliana sulla stampa è dovuta anche
alla percezione, ormai diffusa tra i giornalisti occidentali, che le vicende di Gaza
siano nulla in confronto alle atrocità in Iraq e in Siria."
"In Cisgiordania, la norma è che Israele costruisca illegalmente nuovi
insediamenti e infrastrutture in modo da inglobare tutto quello che ritiene di
valore, condannando così i palestinesi a rimanere in cantoni invivibili e a subire
repressioni e violenze.
A Gaza, invece, la norma è un’esistenza miserabile in un crudele e devastante
stadio d’assedio, gestito da Israele in modo da garantire la mera sopravvivenza e
nulla più."
"Gli esperti israeliani, grazie al loro famoso
efficientismo, davvero calcolarono con precisione le calorie giornaliere
necessarie agli abitanti di Gaza per sopravvivere, mentre intanto li si privava di
medicine, materiali edili e altre cose indispensabili per costruirsi una vita
dignitosa. Le forze militari israeliane li confinarono – via aria, mare e terra – in
quello che il premier britannico David Cameron ha giustamente definito un
campo di prigionia."
"USA e Israele pianificarono immediatamente un
golpe militare per rovesciare il governo regolarmente eletto. E quando Hamas
ebbe l’impudenza di sventare quel piano, gli attacchi e l’assedio israeliani
divennero ancora più spietati."
"I funzionari israeliani elogiano l’umanità di quello che definiscono
«l’esercito più etico al mondo», perché informa i residenti che le loro case
saranno bombardate."
"Gli Stati Uniti decisero
all’istante, insieme con Israele, di punire i palestinesi per aver votato male: fu
imposto un severo stato d’assedio e altre punizioni di vario genere, la violenza
aumentò e gli USA cominciarono subito a progettare un golpe militare per
rovesciare quel governo inaccettabile. Del resto è una pratica già nota, non c’è
bisogno di enumerarne gli infiniti esempi storici. L’Unione Europea,
colpevolmente e a suo discredito, stette al gioco. Immediatamente scattò
l’offensiva israeliana; quella fu la fine dell’accordo di novembre, seguita da una
serie di attacchi da parte di Israele."
"Come qualunque diplomatico sa, quella è la frase tipica di chi è coinvolto in
gravi crimini: «Dimentichiamo il passato, pensiamo invece a un futuro
glorioso»."
"Gli israeliani
hanno dichiarato che pensavano fossero ancora vivi e per questo avevano
avviato un’operazione in Cisgiordania durata diverse settimane, nella speranza, a
loro dire, di trovarli ancora vivi. Intanto, arresti, aggressioni e tutto il resto. Poi è
venuto fuori che gli israeliani sapevano fin dall’inizio che i ragazzi erano stati
uccisi, e sapevano anche che con ogni probabilità Hamas non era coinvolto. Il
governo ha dichiarato che le informazioni in suo possesso indicavano un
coinvolgimento di Hamas; eppure finanche i loro analisti più esperti (tra cui
Shlomi Eldar) avevano detto immediatamente che il rapimento e l’omicidio –
reati orribili, non v’è dubbio – erano stati sicuramente opera di un clan
dissidente, il Qawasameh di Hebron, a cui Hamas non aveva dato il via libera e
che rappresenta anzi una spina nel fianco per la formazione palestinese."
5th book of 2024.
3.5. A mix of essays, Socratic-like dialogues and an adapted Chomsky speech, published post-Operation Protective Edge [1] looking at Palestinian solidarity, the similarities between Israel and the history of South Africa, the dehumanisation of Palestinians which has led to genocide and colonisation, and the support Israel has had from the US and the complacency of Europe. The nature of this compilation means there are several repeated ideas throughout the book in different formats, but I didn’t find it off-putting as it only reinforced them in my memory. A lot of the book seemed to be surrounding the comparisons and differences of Israel and South Africa. Chomsky, especially, makes multiple attacks on the US and their position.
Chomsky says it first, somewhat broadly, that one could replace the word South Africa with Israel throughout history (though he later says there is a big difference between comparing them, after Pappé makes some counterarguments: the white population needed its ‘Black counterpart […] It was its workforce. Israel does not want the Palestinians.’) The beginning of the dialogues go back and forth in that vein as well as discussing the idea that Israel is like a pre-20thC colonising power, and that the idea of a Jewish State is an ‘anomaly’:
Though the introduction claims to have chosen the ‘best’ bits of the talks between Pappé and Chomsky, particularly the ones that caused the most passion and disagreement, I found at almost every point they agreed with each other. A few times, one would say, Yes, but… But on the whole, there wasn’t as much debating as I had anticipated. Both of them are very much on Palestine’s side and lay down the narrative as they see it: that Israel has, for decades, been brainwashing, dehumanising and oppressing Palestine. There is some discussion later in the book about Operation Protective Edge, West Bank and Gaza. They do not speak kindly of Obama or Netanyahu, either.
Overall, an interesting look at some of the main arguments and discussions. I didn’t find it overly detailed or deep, but as a digestible introduction, more than fine. I suppose the primary sources (i.e. their books), would be a better place to research. I do have another book to start soon titled Blaming the Victims, which I am hoping is more detailed and investigative.
__________________
[1] As Operation Protective Edge ended, Israel announced its largest appropriation of West Bank land in thirty years, almost 1,000 acres. Israel Radio reported that the takeover was in response to the killing of the three Jewish teenagers by “Hamas militants.” A Palestinian boy was burned to death in retaliation for the murder, but no Israeli land was handed to Palestinians, nor was there any reaction when an Israeli soldier murdered ten-year-old Khalil Anati on a quiet street in a refugee camp near Hebron on August 10, while the most moral army in the world was smashing Gaza to bits, and then drove away in his jeep as the child bled to death […] To none of this is there any reaction, just as there was no reaction while Israel killed, on average, more than two Palestinian children a week for the past fourteen years. They are unpeople [a], after all.
[a] As coined by Orwell.
3.5. A mix of essays, Socratic-like dialogues and an adapted Chomsky speech, published post-Operation Protective Edge [1] looking at Palestinian solidarity, the similarities between Israel and the history of South Africa, the dehumanisation of Palestinians which has led to genocide and colonisation, and the support Israel has had from the US and the complacency of Europe. The nature of this compilation means there are several repeated ideas throughout the book in different formats, but I didn’t find it off-putting as it only reinforced them in my memory. A lot of the book seemed to be surrounding the comparisons and differences of Israel and South Africa. Chomsky, especially, makes multiple attacks on the US and their position.
Chomsky says it first, somewhat broadly, that one could replace the word South Africa with Israel throughout history (though he later says there is a big difference between comparing them, after Pappé makes some counterarguments: the white population needed its ‘Black counterpart […] It was its workforce. Israel does not want the Palestinians.’) The beginning of the dialogues go back and forth in that vein as well as discussing the idea that Israel is like a pre-20thC colonising power, and that the idea of a Jewish State is an ‘anomaly’:
[NC:] It took a long time for France to become a state. A lot of violence and repression took place. In fact all state formation is a process of extreme violence. That’s why Europe was the most violent place in the world for centuries. Once a state is established, any citizen is a citizen of the state. No matter who you are, if you are a French citizen, you are French. If you live in Israel, and you are an Israeli citizen, you are not a Jew […] Why should we accept this unique anomaly?
Though the introduction claims to have chosen the ‘best’ bits of the talks between Pappé and Chomsky, particularly the ones that caused the most passion and disagreement, I found at almost every point they agreed with each other. A few times, one would say, Yes, but… But on the whole, there wasn’t as much debating as I had anticipated. Both of them are very much on Palestine’s side and lay down the narrative as they see it: that Israel has, for decades, been brainwashing, dehumanising and oppressing Palestine. There is some discussion later in the book about Operation Protective Edge, West Bank and Gaza. They do not speak kindly of Obama or Netanyahu, either.
Overall, an interesting look at some of the main arguments and discussions. I didn’t find it overly detailed or deep, but as a digestible introduction, more than fine. I suppose the primary sources (i.e. their books), would be a better place to research. I do have another book to start soon titled Blaming the Victims, which I am hoping is more detailed and investigative.
__________________
[1] As Operation Protective Edge ended, Israel announced its largest appropriation of West Bank land in thirty years, almost 1,000 acres. Israel Radio reported that the takeover was in response to the killing of the three Jewish teenagers by “Hamas militants.” A Palestinian boy was burned to death in retaliation for the murder, but no Israeli land was handed to Palestinians, nor was there any reaction when an Israeli soldier murdered ten-year-old Khalil Anati on a quiet street in a refugee camp near Hebron on August 10, while the most moral army in the world was smashing Gaza to bits, and then drove away in his jeep as the child bled to death […] To none of this is there any reaction, just as there was no reaction while Israel killed, on average, more than two Palestinian children a week for the past fourteen years. They are unpeople [a], after all.
[a] As coined by Orwell.
With so many differing opinions regarding current world conflicts, I think it’s important to read a variety of voices to gain a better understanding of the history, the current situations, and the impact on the actual people living through events happening in real time. In this book, Noam Chomsky (known as “the father of modern linguistics”) and Ilan Pappé (an Israeli historian) discuss various historical events and political movements that have led to what is currently happening in Gaza and the West Bank. Both have Jewish backgrounds, are historians and professors, and have a history of activism. There are several issues on which they agree (specifically the need for the liberation of Palestine) and others where they disagree, and their discourse around both can be found in this tome.
While the book was written in 2015, many of the issues they discuss are just as (if not more-so) relevant as they were a decade ago. Many of the predictions they made in this book have sadly come to fruition since then, and the information remains important when it comes to activism and understanding the what and why and how of it all.
This may not be the best place to start if you’re just now diving into understanding what’s happening in Palestine though, as there are foundational details you need to be familiar with in order to follow along, including the Oslo Accords, the one-state/two-state argument, the Nakba of 1948, and the BDS Movement. The book is set up in both an interview style as well as including a variety of essays from each author. There is quite a bit of repetition in several of the essays and interviews because of this, especially when it comes to similarities between what’s happening in Israel and Palestine to apartheid South Africa.
This all being said, the discourse is valuable, the information is relevant, and the importance of activism can be found throughout the book. The importance of language is also expressed numerous times, because the way certain words or phrases are used has great impact as we learn or even hear about this crisis.
reflective
sad