On Wednesday, 1,200 Israeli university academics and administrators issued an open letter protesting the “war crimes and even crimes against humanity” committed by the Israeli military in Gaza.
And many of them did. But if you’re a “genocide scholar” and you’re only now coming to the conclusion that this is genocide. 19 months after real scholars correctly pointed to it. You are not a scholar. You are a glorified record keeper.
All of them have been agreeing that Israel is committing genocidal acts pretty much since month, if not week, one. Then the scholarly debate started on whether the sum of genocidal acts already constitutes genocide proper. It’s one of those cases where scholars make distinctions that activists don’t like because activists like simple narratives, punchy slogans, clear-cut lines, as opposed to getting bogged down in nuance.
I’m not saying that activists are wrong calling it a genocide, I’ve been predicting that the Kahanites are going to use the opportunity on day fucking one, but it’s also not right to expect scholars to lower their standards, simplify their analytic framework. There’s a good reason why they apply metric tons of nuance to everything.
but it’s also not right to expect scholars to lower their standards, simplify their analytic framework.
A livestreamed genocide where the perpetrators were unapologetically genocidal since day 0 and with the 100 year history of colonizing Palestine, any “genocide scholar” who was held back by their standards was a glorified record keeper, waiting until it’s widely recognized as a genocide before labeling it as such themselves.
And you’re white-washing their cowardice as scholarly integrity and standards. Bullshit.
A livestreamed genocide where the perpetrators were unapologetically genocidal since day 0
That’s evidence of a genocidal act, and of intent of the precise perpetrators. It does not, on its own, prove that Israel, as opposed to merely those people, are guilty of genocide. Israel could, for example, have brought them to justice themselves.
And you’re white-washing their cowardice as scholarly integrity and standards. Bullshit.
Upholding things like the presumption of innocence and due process does not preclude me from shouting “stop the thief”. As said: I’ve been doing that since day one. Yet, when dragging that thief before court, I’d still expect the court to actually look at the matter in detail. Those procedural hoops exist for good reason: Justice cannot be served by mob rule.
All of them have been agreeing that Israel is committing genocidal acts pretty much since month, if not week, one. Then the scholarly debate started on whether the sum of genocidal acts already constitutes genocide proper. It’s one of those cases where scholars make distinctions that activists don’t like because activists like simple narratives, punchy slogans, clear-cut lines, as opposed to getting bogged down in nuance.
I’m not saying that activists are wrong calling it a genocide, I’ve been predicting that the Kahanites are going to use the opportunity on day fucking one, but it’s also not right to expect scholars to lower their standards, simplify their analytic framework. There’s a good reason why they apply metric tons of nuance to everything.
A livestreamed genocide where the perpetrators were unapologetically genocidal since day 0 and with the 100 year history of colonizing Palestine, any “genocide scholar” who was held back by their standards was a glorified record keeper, waiting until it’s widely recognized as a genocide before labeling it as such themselves.
And you’re white-washing their cowardice as scholarly integrity and standards. Bullshit.
That’s evidence of a genocidal act, and of intent of the precise perpetrators. It does not, on its own, prove that Israel, as opposed to merely those people, are guilty of genocide. Israel could, for example, have brought them to justice themselves.
Upholding things like the presumption of innocence and due process does not preclude me from shouting “stop the thief”. As said: I’ve been doing that since day one. Yet, when dragging that thief before court, I’d still expect the court to actually look at the matter in detail. Those procedural hoops exist for good reason: Justice cannot be served by mob rule.