The Unsanctioned Alliance
By Matt Hribersek
May 13, 2024
Source: Originally published by Z. Feel free to share widely.
Mick Sweetman - Queers for Palestine. Flickr.
The ethnic cleansing in Gaza, or at least what is left of it, continues. Tens of thousands have already been killed, many more mutilated, dispossessed and orphaned. While minor concerns over the situation have been heard echoing from the highest stratospheres of European and American politics, the weapons sales and the military aid continue to flow Israel’s way unabashed. The main outrage over the disproportionate and indiscriminate onslaught, as usual, comes from the sections of the civil society. Especially the students but unsurprisingly also the factions of the population that have (at least traditionally) themselves been disenfranchised, such as for example the LGBT community.
The former has received ample media attention as the authorities worldwide have jointly committed themselves to beating the ideas of free speech and universal ethics out of students’ heads by any means necessary; threats, arrests, fists or teargas. The latter movements, however have only received minor honorable mention in the media, as they have been ridiculed and dismissed from their conception onwards. “Queers for Palestine” sprung up early into the assault, as it quickly became evident that this is not going to be just another “mowing of the grass” episode but instead, an attempt at complete eradication of Gaza.
Plenty has already been written on the topic of the conflict by the people far more competent on the matter than myself, therefore this article is not an attempt at that. Instead, what I find fascinating and not widely discussed is the discourse that grew around the Queers for Palestine movement. Outside as well as within it. The queer community has been a popular prop for the left leaning politicians to flaunt their liberal stipes for some time now. However, it is no secret that the prop is only useful as long as it is managed, controlled and sanitized into a pale, diluted and odorless room spray, inoffensive to the masses and unthreatening to the established order and its patrons.
With the clear stance of the Queers for Paletine movement on the current Israel war against Palestine, the community stepped out of line of acceptable discourse in the mainstream and hence earned itself a fatwah from the high priests of the liberal taught. The usual arsenal to discredit any disobedient movement was swiftly employed, followed by continued silent treatment of the most media outlets. The queers were patronizingly explained that the side they stand on is the side they have nothing in common with and, would the situation be reversed, the Gazans would not reciprocate the good graces towards the queers. Unsurprisingly, the movement has quickly been labeled as delusional and naïve for expressing the support for the Muslims, that would, that’s how the story goes, stone them to death in a heartbeat. While such criticism is usually concocted by the far right, the liberal guardians of polite society are more than willing to adopt this narrative to stoke out dissent within their own ranks.
Even if this was the case and they would in fact stone gays to death in Gaza on daily basis and even if every single Palestinian would personally hate my guts and wish me nothing but death, does that justify their indiscriminate slaughter, killings and mutilations of children, bombing of hospitals, mass starvation and the rest of the crimes under the international law? Shall the universal principles of ethics and morals be conditioned upon personal relations between those who are applying them and those whom they are applied to? One crime does not another right make and anyone arguing that the queers have no business opposing the ethnic cleansing of a majority Muslim community should be politely encouraged to revisit the last two millennia of writings on ethics and morals.
According to the critics, it should be the queers of all that should be unequivocally supporting Israel. Democratic and liberal Israel is after all, we are reminded, the only safe haven for the gays in an otherwise “barbaric and Muslim Orient”, as an unspoken yet still persistent colonial subtext reads. Tel Aviv is a place to be and wild parties abound are seemingly a parameter upon which one’s stance on ethnic cleansing is to be weighed. Universal humanism (and the international law for that matter) needs, according the liberal establishment be applied based on a singular political question and personal identity.
Discussing all this, and being as a community on the receiving end of the criticism, we should not forget that these are typical right wing attacks employing juvenile arguments, akin to the popular dismissal of those who criticize capitalism but simultaneously own an iPhone. Such logic is too infantile to be worthy of further discussion, but it seems to be the only thing left once the establishment runs out of genuine arguments. Criticism of the Queers for Palestine movement as illegitimate deserves no entertainment from the community. For it is not the queers in this situation that are naïve for recognizing common humanity that transcends their personal experience. Rather it is the those in charge and their media pundits that are intentionally ignorant and resorting to cheap attacks to desperately try to maintain synchronous thinking and the structure of power.
This criticism is yet another attempt at controlling the political thought of the left, keeping it within the very narrow constraints of the permissible discourse. The outrage demonstrates once more that the alleged left establishment has no interest in hearing or representing their constituents and their factions, but instead desires to control and manage them. Stereotyping the immensely diverse community into small and manageable pieces that embellish the liberal regalia in which the politicians will adorn themselves during every election cycle. But it is failing to work and the cracks are showing. The immense violence to which the states have to resort in order to suppress the opposition to the destruction of Gaza is indicative of their desperation and failure.
Our community may well be a patchwork of varying experiences, views and needs. There may be countless disagreements within it. But what the community rightfully does not fail to recognize is the underlaying common humanity that transcends our differences. And which transcends the community. And in the world of countless divisions and self-interested groups, it is incomprehensible to those in power, that some may just be able to oppose a crime solely for what it is; a crime. Unconditionally and not out of convenience.
Mick Sweetman - Queers for Palestine. Flickr.
The ethnic cleansing in Gaza, or at least what is left of it, continues. Tens of thousands have already been killed, many more mutilated, dispossessed and orphaned. While minor concerns over the situation have been heard echoing from the highest stratospheres of European and American politics, the weapons sales and the military aid continue to flow Israel’s way unabashed. The main outrage over the disproportionate and indiscriminate onslaught, as usual, comes from the sections of the civil society. Especially the students but unsurprisingly also the factions of the population that have (at least traditionally) themselves been disenfranchised, such as for example the LGBT community.
The former has received ample media attention as the authorities worldwide have jointly committed themselves to beating the ideas of free speech and universal ethics out of students’ heads by any means necessary; threats, arrests, fists or teargas. The latter movements, however have only received minor honorable mention in the media, as they have been ridiculed and dismissed from their conception onwards. “Queers for Palestine” sprung up early into the assault, as it quickly became evident that this is not going to be just another “mowing of the grass” episode but instead, an attempt at complete eradication of Gaza.
Plenty has already been written on the topic of the conflict by the people far more competent on the matter than myself, therefore this article is not an attempt at that. Instead, what I find fascinating and not widely discussed is the discourse that grew around the Queers for Palestine movement. Outside as well as within it. The queer community has been a popular prop for the left leaning politicians to flaunt their liberal stipes for some time now. However, it is no secret that the prop is only useful as long as it is managed, controlled and sanitized into a pale, diluted and odorless room spray, inoffensive to the masses and unthreatening to the established order and its patrons.
With the clear stance of the Queers for Paletine movement on the current Israel war against Palestine, the community stepped out of line of acceptable discourse in the mainstream and hence earned itself a fatwah from the high priests of the liberal taught. The usual arsenal to discredit any disobedient movement was swiftly employed, followed by continued silent treatment of the most media outlets. The queers were patronizingly explained that the side they stand on is the side they have nothing in common with and, would the situation be reversed, the Gazans would not reciprocate the good graces towards the queers. Unsurprisingly, the movement has quickly been labeled as delusional and naïve for expressing the support for the Muslims, that would, that’s how the story goes, stone them to death in a heartbeat. While such criticism is usually concocted by the far right, the liberal guardians of polite society are more than willing to adopt this narrative to stoke out dissent within their own ranks.
Even if this was the case and they would in fact stone gays to death in Gaza on daily basis and even if every single Palestinian would personally hate my guts and wish me nothing but death, does that justify their indiscriminate slaughter, killings and mutilations of children, bombing of hospitals, mass starvation and the rest of the crimes under the international law? Shall the universal principles of ethics and morals be conditioned upon personal relations between those who are applying them and those whom they are applied to? One crime does not another right make and anyone arguing that the queers have no business opposing the ethnic cleansing of a majority Muslim community should be politely encouraged to revisit the last two millennia of writings on ethics and morals.
According to the critics, it should be the queers of all that should be unequivocally supporting Israel. Democratic and liberal Israel is after all, we are reminded, the only safe haven for the gays in an otherwise “barbaric and Muslim Orient”, as an unspoken yet still persistent colonial subtext reads. Tel Aviv is a place to be and wild parties abound are seemingly a parameter upon which one’s stance on ethnic cleansing is to be weighed. Universal humanism (and the international law for that matter) needs, according the liberal establishment be applied based on a singular political question and personal identity.
Discussing all this, and being as a community on the receiving end of the criticism, we should not forget that these are typical right wing attacks employing juvenile arguments, akin to the popular dismissal of those who criticize capitalism but simultaneously own an iPhone. Such logic is too infantile to be worthy of further discussion, but it seems to be the only thing left once the establishment runs out of genuine arguments. Criticism of the Queers for Palestine movement as illegitimate deserves no entertainment from the community. For it is not the queers in this situation that are naïve for recognizing common humanity that transcends their personal experience. Rather it is the those in charge and their media pundits that are intentionally ignorant and resorting to cheap attacks to desperately try to maintain synchronous thinking and the structure of power.
This criticism is yet another attempt at controlling the political thought of the left, keeping it within the very narrow constraints of the permissible discourse. The outrage demonstrates once more that the alleged left establishment has no interest in hearing or representing their constituents and their factions, but instead desires to control and manage them. Stereotyping the immensely diverse community into small and manageable pieces that embellish the liberal regalia in which the politicians will adorn themselves during every election cycle. But it is failing to work and the cracks are showing. The immense violence to which the states have to resort in order to suppress the opposition to the destruction of Gaza is indicative of their desperation and failure.
Our community may well be a patchwork of varying experiences, views and needs. There may be countless disagreements within it. But what the community rightfully does not fail to recognize is the underlaying common humanity that transcends our differences. And which transcends the community. And in the world of countless divisions and self-interested groups, it is incomprehensible to those in power, that some may just be able to oppose a crime solely for what it is; a crime. Unconditionally and not out of convenience.
No comments:
Post a Comment