You need to sign in or sign up before continuing.
Take a photo of a barcode or cover
4.25 AVERAGE
4.25 AVERAGE
challenging
informative
reflective
slow-paced
challenging
informative
reflective
medium-paced
Beautifully written, easily understood but the writing was precise enough that it didn't feel as though it was being "dumbed down" for the general public. Super informative and a great insight into both the history of the war as well as future steps that must be taken. The piece taken from Noam Chomsky's address to the UN was very well done and a great wake up call
informative
reflective
sad
medium-paced
dark
informative
medium-paced
informative
reflective
sad
slow-paced
challenging
informative
reflective
reflective
Ngl, this was unbearably moderate and limited by its liberal framework.
The essays and interviews were clear and readable. Pappé had consistently good contributions (those three stars are for him). But man, Chomsky was not it.
There were two Chomskys in here. Part 1 Chomsky, written before the 2014 bombings of Gaza, where he had a ‘not all men’-style defense of Zionism, hesitated to call it apartheid, and used utilitarianism to assess ‘good’ activism. Plus some nonsense about how a two-state solution leads to a single state because economic cooperation erodes borders? Sure, Jan 👀
And then there was Part 2 Chomsky, with an essay thoroughly critiquing Israel’s treatment of Gaza, even calling it genocide (though offering no solution beyond a moral obligation to apply human rights in a religion-blind way).
The two Chomskys had me questioning the book’s ontology. Is it cynical to say he changed because post-2014, these arguments were more publicly palatable? He did stress that pro-Palestine activism should be proportional to public knowledge and sentiment…
Idk… maybe Chomsky’s strategy read as pragmatism in 2015. But it reads as complicity in 2024. I kept wondering: was this an activism stepping stone, or a false start? And the cranky part of me thinks it’s the latter.
Call me crazy, but if you’re going to situate yourself at the forefront of a pro-Palestinian movement Chomsky, you gotta have compassion for Palestinians. Not dispassionately and uncritically say the way forward is either a “rotten solution” (an unfair two-state arrangement) or the current plan, that Palestinians “can mostly rot, or maybe flee” which Has. Aged. Like. Milk.
Human rights are great and all. But pushing for moderation in activism to avoid backlashes? That’s no longer the vibe. I wanted to be charitable, say this moderate discourse has its place in the UN perhaps. But the last chapter was literally Chomsky’s speech to the UN—so toothless I’d argue it was less of a scolding and more of an endorsement of the status quo. And that ain’t activism.
The essays and interviews were clear and readable. Pappé had consistently good contributions (those three stars are for him). But man, Chomsky was not it.
There were two Chomskys in here. Part 1 Chomsky, written before the 2014 bombings of Gaza, where he had a ‘not all men’-style defense of Zionism, hesitated to call it apartheid, and used utilitarianism to assess ‘good’ activism. Plus some nonsense about how a two-state solution leads to a single state because economic cooperation erodes borders? Sure, Jan 👀
And then there was Part 2 Chomsky, with an essay thoroughly critiquing Israel’s treatment of Gaza, even calling it genocide (though offering no solution beyond a moral obligation to apply human rights in a religion-blind way).
The two Chomskys had me questioning the book’s ontology. Is it cynical to say he changed because post-2014, these arguments were more publicly palatable? He did stress that pro-Palestine activism should be proportional to public knowledge and sentiment…
Idk… maybe Chomsky’s strategy read as pragmatism in 2015. But it reads as complicity in 2024. I kept wondering: was this an activism stepping stone, or a false start? And the cranky part of me thinks it’s the latter.
Call me crazy, but if you’re going to situate yourself at the forefront of a pro-Palestinian movement Chomsky, you gotta have compassion for Palestinians. Not dispassionately and uncritically say the way forward is either a “rotten solution” (an unfair two-state arrangement) or the current plan, that Palestinians “can mostly rot, or maybe flee” which Has. Aged. Like. Milk.
Human rights are great and all. But pushing for moderation in activism to avoid backlashes? That’s no longer the vibe. I wanted to be charitable, say this moderate discourse has its place in the UN perhaps. But the last chapter was literally Chomsky’s speech to the UN—so toothless I’d argue it was less of a scolding and more of an endorsement of the status quo. And that ain’t activism.
challenging
informative
inspiring
sad
medium-paced
"There is a difference between a peace train that takes us all to a better destination, which is the peace process that we don't have, and the peace train that runs over everyone on the way to the so-called peace." - Ilan Pappé
"For those concerned with the rights of the brutalised Palestinians, there can be no higher priority than working to change US policies." - Noam Chomsky
Noam Chomsky and Ilan Pappé are two absolutely brilliant thinkers and activists. Their arguments are intelligent, well thought-out, and enlightening. The ideas collected in this book are so important in understanding the history behind the Israel-Palestine "issue". They also outline what must be done now and in the future to create a free Palestine state.
This book was published after the 2014 massacre on Gaza by Israel but the discussions within it are now more relevant than ever. Just change the 2014 to 2024, fifty day massacre to six month ongoing genocide, and 2200 Palestinians killed to 31000. In their discussion, Chomsky and Pappé were hopeful that "in the near future" things would get better. However here we are, a decade later, and Israel is still allowed to commit grotesque crimes with impunity. This made for a very depressing read.
I'm taking half a star off my rating because I felt the "dialogues" part of the book didn't work that well for me. It was essentially a transcription of conversations between Chomsky and Pappé, and I couldn't read their tone at times. It might've been better as an essay.
"For those concerned with the rights of the brutalised Palestinians, there can be no higher priority than working to change US policies." - Noam Chomsky
Noam Chomsky and Ilan Pappé are two absolutely brilliant thinkers and activists. Their arguments are intelligent, well thought-out, and enlightening. The ideas collected in this book are so important in understanding the history behind the Israel-Palestine "issue". They also outline what must be done now and in the future to create a free Palestine state.
This book was published after the 2014 massacre on Gaza by Israel but the discussions within it are now more relevant than ever. Just change the 2014 to 2024, fifty day massacre to six month ongoing genocide, and 2200 Palestinians killed to 31000. In their discussion, Chomsky and Pappé were hopeful that "in the near future" things would get better. However here we are, a decade later, and Israel is still allowed to commit grotesque crimes with impunity. This made for a very depressing read.
I'm taking half a star off my rating because I felt the "dialogues" part of the book didn't work that well for me. It was essentially a transcription of conversations between Chomsky and Pappé, and I couldn't read their tone at times. It might've been better as an essay.
challenging
informative
medium-paced