Anonymous #1 4d

I mean we even had someone in this channel say if you believe in resistance you can’t condemn anything the resistance group does. Like no activist ever has had that ideology, no one successful at least

14

Anonymous #1 4d

That person isn’t Jewish. I don’t care anymore.

6

Anonymous OP 4d

Tbh that commenter was probably genuinely not Jewish

5

Anonymous #3 3d

and the people who think otherwise would have condemned indigenous attacks on European settlers and African slave revolts ignoring the larger genocides that Africans and indigenous North Americans were faced with. conveniently this sort of stance always aligns with settlers

14

Anonymous #3 3d

open a book, start with Fanon’s Wretched of the Earth

9

Anonymous #3 3d

and if we want Hamas to cease to exist, then we should also want an end to the occupation

14

Anonymous #3 3d

I have read him. There’s a little more nuance here. He actually says that violence is historically inevitable but does warn pretty strongly against the idea that any action by the oppressed should be blindly accepted or left unguided

14

Anonymous #3 3d

Also, if violence is not structured a certain way, it’s going to turn inward, that’s a pretty big portion of that book which I think rejects the idea of never condemning violence from the oppressed

8

Anonymous #3 3d

But I do agree with your point about wanting the occupation needing to cease to exist and Fanons perspective but what you’re saying is technically a slight deviation from what he argues

6

Anonymous #1 3d

Idk why I said want and need mb. Point above needing the occupation***

8

Anonymous #1 3d

truth. unguided violence is misguided violence. the issue here is colonialism, and colonialism is inherently a violent act. violence that is not directed at the larger systemic reinforcers of violence is misdirected. Hamas is not exempt from critique, but it is understandable the position where the misguided violence comes from. it’s like a child who has had its face bashed in. can we really act surprised when they lash out, and are the episodes in anyway comparable to that of the initiators? no

1

Anonymous #3 3d

I agree with your point but the unguided argument from Fanon is still about violence from the oppressed. Because colonialism is ongoing violence in the society, it has psychological outcomes in the oppressed. Because of this, their violence is not always rational in its delivery and due to the violence the colonial state has implemented its inevitable. Meaning it’s designed for them to be violent and go inward to sustain the violence of the state. That’s why Fanon thinks resistance violence need

3

Anonymous #3 3d

needs to be guided so that it doesn’t go inward because the state designed it so that it would go inward.

8

Anonymous #3 3d

That was kinda bad phrasing I’m basically saying that Fanon’s point about “misguided” violence is not that all violence by the oppressed is justified or can’t be condemned, but that colonialism can distort and redirect that violence inward unless it is politically guided so the violence from the oppressed also needs to be guided. Otherwise the system will inevitably lead it to turn inward

4

Anonymous #3 3d

Also yes it’s understandable which Fanon argues with his inevitability argument. Im addressed the argument about guidance and it would be a mistake to just write it off and say “well we can’t blame them therefore we can’t condemn them.” Then it’ll turn inward and Fanon said that’s actually a predictable response both from the oppressed and the viewer saying these statements. That’s why it needs to be guided

1

Anonymous #1 3d

i mean i suppose the conversation at this point is whether Hamas’ actions are guided towards national liberation or if it is a form of violence that will cannibalize itself and the Palestinian liberation movement. i do not think Hamas’ is wholly unguided and their investment into mutual aid and institutions which promote Palestinian wellbeing indicate this. violent resistance is only one aspect of Hamas’ existence. at one point the Palestinian resistance was secular and marxist, and it was

6

Anonymous #3 3d

vilified all the same

9

Anonymous #3 3d

and not at one point, the PLO still exists, and the PFLP are still relevant actors in the movement. one orients itself in opposition to Hamas, while the other aligns itself with the armed struggle that Hamas has chosen to take. you’re correct in that i was reductive saying that the resistance of the oppressed should *never* be condemned. it should be, there should be ruthless criticism of all that exists, in that same vein, those who center critique of the oppressed advance the cause of the

9

Anonymous #3 3d

oppressor usually

3

Anonymous #3 3d

who center *only* the critique of the oppressed**

1

Anonymous #3 3d

Are

1

Anonymous #3 3d

Agree*

4

Anonymous #4 3d

I see what you’re saying but that’s just not true. The protest at the synagogue last week had numerous members chanting “Say it loud, say it clear: We support Hamas here!” and “We are Hamas here.”

6

Anonymous #4 3d

And had them chanting that and similar things in protests outside different synagogues in the past year. Like I totally see what you’re getting at and I’m inclined to agree but the protestors on the ground definitely have some numbers that go against your statement

4

Anonymous #6 2d

From my experience tho most people who are “pro Hamas” are more pro them as in seeing them as a lesser evil, rather than supporting them wholeheartedly Like even ppl I’ve known who don’t want to criticize them usually that’s for tactical reasons rather than like outright support for that stuff and sometimes they’ll criticize them privately

5

Anonymous #6 2d

True

6

Anonymous #4 2d

Goymaxxing. Your foreskin reconstruction surgery has been scheduled for next Tuesday

-1

Anonymous #6 2d

Let him know his Jew card has been revoked

4