Philosophers, it's fair to say, have not covered themselves in glory in the context of the Hamas atrocities and the subsequent war. The controversy (and the letters) keep coming. Oxford philosopher Peter Hacker has penned a sharp response to the open letter from Oxford academics (which has already generated two other responses--see the fourth item here).
Now another group of philosophers--while disclaiming "any unique authority--moral, intellectual or otherwise"--have issued a statement (hereafter "Philosophers for Palestine" letter) that certainly makes the open letter from Oxford academics look measured. (This new statement has already generated a pointed and interesting response from Seyla Benhabib.) Since the Philosophers for Palestine admit the basis for their letter is not academic expertise, what is the basis?
[O]ur discipline has made admirable strides recently in confronting philosophy’s historically exclusionary practices and in engaging directly with pressing and urgent injustices. To this end, we call on our colleagues in philosophy to join us in overcoming complicity and silence.
The fact that academic philosophy now includes more women and racial and ethnic minorities seems like a pretty tenuous connection with events in Israel/Gaza (was the dearth of women in academic philosophy at one time really an "injustice" on a par with the situation of the Palestinians?). That silliness aside, the letter makes serious claims, some of which I'm actually sympathetic to. But the contrast with the letter I signed two weeks ago, and encouraged others to sign, is striking.
The latter letter began with a forthright condemnation of "Hamas for its heinous crimes against humanity," which is what the intentional mass murder of civilians is. By contrast the letter from the Philosophers for Palestine says only this about the Hamas atrocities:
To focus, as we do here, on the actions of the Israeli state and the unflagging support it receives from the US and its allies, is neither to celebrate violence, nor to equivocate on the value of innocent lives. Civilian deaths, regardless of nationality, are tragic and unacceptable. Yet to act as though the history of violence began with Hamas’s attacks on October 7, 2023 is to display a reckless indifference to history as well as to both Palestinian and Israeli lives.
That's pretty tepid, I would say. No one who condemns Hamas's mass murder of civilians has claimed the history of violence began on October 7. Indeed, the letter I signed, in addition to prioritizing securing the freedom of the hostages, and avoiding "collective punishment" of Gaza civilians, also demanded an "[e]nd [to] the violent oppression of the Palestinian people. Apartheid, the West Bank's decades-long Occupation, keeping Gaza's two-million Palestinians under siege for 16 years, erasing the memory of the Nakba, now all contribute to the brutalization and violence."
The letter from the Philosophers for Palestine also charges Israel with "an unfolding genocide." As Professor Hacker observes in his own letter, "Had the Israelis taken the view so shamefully ascribed to them, they would simply have carpet-bombed Gaza until no one was left. In fact, they warned Gazans to relocate, and Hamas did their best to discourage this." (To be clear, I disagree with portions of Professor Hacker's letter; as but one example, allied bombing of German cities would constitute a paradigmatic "war crime" under the international norms that emerged out of the catastrophe of WWII.)
The letter from Philosophers for Palestine concludes professing "solidarity" with Palestine (but not, e.g., with the families of murdered Israelis, or those Israelis who have had to flee their homes due to Hamas and Hezbollah, etc.), and also endorses the BDS movement. If one is trying to get signatories to the letter, linking the call for a ceasefire in Gaza (which I support) to BDS seems imprudent. But these are philosophers, after all!
Recent Comments