Somehow I have never seen the film PCU, so thank you for this summary. I didn't realize it had become a cult classic.
I agree with many of Breakey's points. As for calls of Jewish genocide, I am unaware as to what comprised the actual speech in question. Looking at this through a censorship angle as opposed to an identity politics lens, I do think students should be allowed to protest in favor of Palestinians without that necessarily being categorized as advocating for the genocide of Jewish people.
For sure, pro-Palestinian protests constitute protected speech; it's the "river to the sea" chant that, for many, crosses the line, because it is implicitly stating that Palestine will be free of Jews.
Uh, the phrase fron the river to the sea is in the Likud platform, referring to a Jewish state. Settlers cab easily be seen saying this. Zionism trades in everything all identity politics does and the anti-woke Zionists sneer at Blacks when they make these kinds of arguments where they think every single person in thee group Isa metaphysical victim of historical oppression and always in the verge of re-enslavement. Zionism is an anti-colonialist ideology obsessed with the false idea that the Romans expelled all Jews from Palestine and this entitled immigrants to show up and expel the inhabitants of a place (who genetics show are also Jews, but who never left and went with the flow). I can't fathom how people skeptical of wokeness can't see Zionism deploying all the same rhetorical tactics both in self justification and in dealing with criticism.
Uh, the congresswoman in the hearing did exactly what those of us tired of DEI overreach did and tons of allegedly anti-woke people fell for it. She concept creeped "calls for genocide". The issue wasn't actual calls for genocide but rather calling for intifada or a free Palestine fron the river to the sea. Neither of which is a call for genocide. The congresswoman was doing what "anti-racists" do in equating criticism of a racialist ideology (Zionism) with racism. The simplistic Zionism of the anti-woke crowd and how they duplicate every logical fallacy of the woke in behalf of Israel is really helping us see who is principled about sacred victim identity politics and for whom it is just a weapon for western chauvinism. Zionism shares with other woke identity politics every last detail.
Everyone has been correctly calling out the free speech hypocrisy of academia on wider latitude for criticism of Israel, which is true enough, but what really needs explaining are anti-Woke Zionists and because of understandable holocaust guilt. Nobody is willing to say the obvious - that Zionism trades in metaphysical eternal victim politics to get its way for otherwise bafflingly nonsensical foundational political claims that a place with nearly no Jews in 1903 actually belongs to European Jews rather than the people who live there. Especially given that we know for sure via genetics that the Palestinians are also "Jewish" (not Arab) in the sense that term made genetic sense in the ancient world rather than designating a gradually coalescing group of assorted hennotheistic/monotheistic Levantines. And the anti-woke Zionists indulge it in a way they would never indulge Black people trading on slavery for such political exceptionalism and it has to be just western chauvinism rather than principle. Or maybe just there is no primary source video showing how awful the trans-Atlantic slave trade was so the misery and death is too abstract. And they make the same mistake of thinking that critiquing an ideology is the same as imaging modern people should self-suicide or self-deport owing to the crazy reasoning of their grandparents. I don't believe in metaphysical suffering that is embodied in every individual in a group with disparate group data and I don't believe in "ancestral trauma" and I don't believe groups are units of suffering, but rather the individuals in groups. And my position is consistent for both woke victimhood and Zionism. And I would make the same critique of Arab nationalism, pan-Arabism and the Islamic world's victimhood grievance, given the very existence of an Arabic world (based on languange, but clearly not genes) is because of their own colonialism and an equally or even more destructive African slave trade. I care about the victims who suffer, not the groups who suffer since a group is not a unit of suffering.
Somehow I have never seen the film PCU, so thank you for this summary. I didn't realize it had become a cult classic.
I agree with many of Breakey's points. As for calls of Jewish genocide, I am unaware as to what comprised the actual speech in question. Looking at this through a censorship angle as opposed to an identity politics lens, I do think students should be allowed to protest in favor of Palestinians without that necessarily being categorized as advocating for the genocide of Jewish people.
For sure, pro-Palestinian protests constitute protected speech; it's the "river to the sea" chant that, for many, crosses the line, because it is implicitly stating that Palestine will be free of Jews.
I'm unqualified to comment on that one, but I agree that something like "Free Gaza" should fall under protected speech.
Uh, the phrase fron the river to the sea is in the Likud platform, referring to a Jewish state. Settlers cab easily be seen saying this. Zionism trades in everything all identity politics does and the anti-woke Zionists sneer at Blacks when they make these kinds of arguments where they think every single person in thee group Isa metaphysical victim of historical oppression and always in the verge of re-enslavement. Zionism is an anti-colonialist ideology obsessed with the false idea that the Romans expelled all Jews from Palestine and this entitled immigrants to show up and expel the inhabitants of a place (who genetics show are also Jews, but who never left and went with the flow). I can't fathom how people skeptical of wokeness can't see Zionism deploying all the same rhetorical tactics both in self justification and in dealing with criticism.
Uh, the congresswoman in the hearing did exactly what those of us tired of DEI overreach did and tons of allegedly anti-woke people fell for it. She concept creeped "calls for genocide". The issue wasn't actual calls for genocide but rather calling for intifada or a free Palestine fron the river to the sea. Neither of which is a call for genocide. The congresswoman was doing what "anti-racists" do in equating criticism of a racialist ideology (Zionism) with racism. The simplistic Zionism of the anti-woke crowd and how they duplicate every logical fallacy of the woke in behalf of Israel is really helping us see who is principled about sacred victim identity politics and for whom it is just a weapon for western chauvinism. Zionism shares with other woke identity politics every last detail.
You should write a post for the Substack!
Everyone has been correctly calling out the free speech hypocrisy of academia on wider latitude for criticism of Israel, which is true enough, but what really needs explaining are anti-Woke Zionists and because of understandable holocaust guilt. Nobody is willing to say the obvious - that Zionism trades in metaphysical eternal victim politics to get its way for otherwise bafflingly nonsensical foundational political claims that a place with nearly no Jews in 1903 actually belongs to European Jews rather than the people who live there. Especially given that we know for sure via genetics that the Palestinians are also "Jewish" (not Arab) in the sense that term made genetic sense in the ancient world rather than designating a gradually coalescing group of assorted hennotheistic/monotheistic Levantines. And the anti-woke Zionists indulge it in a way they would never indulge Black people trading on slavery for such political exceptionalism and it has to be just western chauvinism rather than principle. Or maybe just there is no primary source video showing how awful the trans-Atlantic slave trade was so the misery and death is too abstract. And they make the same mistake of thinking that critiquing an ideology is the same as imaging modern people should self-suicide or self-deport owing to the crazy reasoning of their grandparents. I don't believe in metaphysical suffering that is embodied in every individual in a group with disparate group data and I don't believe in "ancestral trauma" and I don't believe groups are units of suffering, but rather the individuals in groups. And my position is consistent for both woke victimhood and Zionism. And I would make the same critique of Arab nationalism, pan-Arabism and the Islamic world's victimhood grievance, given the very existence of an Arabic world (based on languange, but clearly not genes) is because of their own colonialism and an equally or even more destructive African slave trade. I care about the victims who suffer, not the groups who suffer since a group is not a unit of suffering.