http://palestinethinktank.com/2008/07/08/just-intellectuals-oppression-resistance-and-the-public-role-of-intellectuals/ Free Minds for a Free Palestine Fri, 19 Mar 2010 15:01:08 +0300 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.8.6 hourly 1 http://palestinethinktank.com/2008/07/08/just-intellectuals-oppression-resistance-and-the-public-role-of-intellectuals/#comment-1303 Christos Symeou Wed, 09 Jul 2008 23:50:46 +0000 http://palestinethinktank.com/?p=864#comment-1303 It seems to me, if boycott is seen by Israeli intellectuals as 'ineffective' or 'counter-productive', what would Israeli intellectuals see as a valid form of resistance? Civil disobedience is met with violence, armed struggle is terrorism, and information campaigns to the outside world are propaganda. So if the only valid form of action is 'joint projects' for re-educating the oppresor, does that not first imply that you accept and recognize the oppresor - and thus its policies-? And is that not in effect reliant on the good will of the Israeli intellectual who will agree to work with the Palestinian, almost a sign of superiority in that to act you first have to find an agreeable partner from the other side. Its as if an Israeli intellectual tells, 'You are lucly, I am here, I will allow you to work in Israeli, which you obviously recognize to do so, and knowing how bad your life is, you can be seen as my oppressed pet, so our public can have mercy on you and recognize the errors of their ways'. I DO feel that changing attititudes in Israel itself can be a good cause- but why should a struggle be reliant only on actions which in effect rely on the goodwill and effective recognition of the oppresive side? It seems to me, if boycott is seen by Israeli intellectuals as 'ineffective' or 'counter-productive', what would Israeli intellectuals see as a valid form of resistance? Civil disobedience is met with violence, armed struggle is terrorism, and information campaigns to the outside world are propaganda. So if the only valid form of action is 'joint projects' for re-educating the oppresor, does that not first imply that you accept and recognize the oppresor – and thus its policies-? And is that not in effect reliant on the good will of the Israeli intellectual who will agree to work with the Palestinian, almost a sign of superiority in that to act you first have to find an agreeable partner from the other side. Its as if an Israeli intellectual tells, 'You are lucly, I am here, I will allow you to work in Israeli, which you obviously recognize to do so, and knowing how bad your life is, you can be seen as my oppressed pet, so our public can have mercy on you and recognize the errors of their ways'. I DO feel that changing attititudes in Israel itself can be a good cause- but why should a struggle be reliant only on actions which in effect rely on the goodwill and effective recognition of the oppresive side?

]]>