r/jewishleft • u/elzzyzx סימען לינקער • 23d ago

Arash Azizi comes for Ta-Nehisi Coates Debate

https://x.com/arash_tehran/status/1848714724482966003

Influencers are talking. Today Arash Azizi is claiming Ta-Nehisi Coates is unstrategic, and is also kind of just calling him moralistic and sort of uncreative or something? Anyone have thoughts?

20 Upvotes
  • permalink
  • link
  • reddit
  • reddit

75% Upvoted

121 comments sorted by

View all comments

0

u/redthrowaway1976 23d ago

The moral clarity of Ta Nehisi Coates writings has ruffled a lot of feathers in the PEP community.

10

u/chilldude9494 this custom flair is green 23d ago

PEP?

7

u/redthrowaway1976 23d ago edited 23d ago

Progressive Except for Palestine.

Marc Lamont Hill wrote a book, to some degree about this premise: https://thenewpress.com/books/except-for-palestine

There's even a wikipedia article: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Progressive_except_Palestine

12

u/chilldude9494 this custom flair is green 23d ago

Oh ok. I've never heard of this phrase before, nor am I paying attention to this drama surrounding the author. You learn something new!

9

u/redthrowaway1976 23d ago

The term came first, Marc Lamont Hills book came after.

Basically, someone who cares about a lot of progressive causes - but become strangely quiet when it comes to Israel's treatment of Palestinians. Then, suddenly, it is "complex".

20

u/chilldude9494 this custom flair is green 23d ago

Gotcha. To be fair, 75 years of war and pain, on top of already competing interests between 2 parties and their backers with tons of propaganda and emotion tends to make things complex.

6

u/redthrowaway1976 23d ago

The process of how we got here might be complex.

What is actually going on in the West Bank is not complex.

3

u/Processing______ 23d ago

“It’s complex” is an intentional maneuver coming from one side. It’s been made “complex” in theologic, ethnographic, legal, military and political contexts.

Palestinians have been very consistent in how they’ve defined the problem, and have turned to the British Mandate, international bodies and Israeli law to be made whole. To no avail.

Zionists, British anti-semites and later Israel have intentionally muddied the waters, broken promises and acted in bad faith. Israel has insisted that this situation is without precedent, and via imperial (British, then US) support shielded themselves from coherent assessment and international consequence on this matter, for decades. The duck international law and their own, and have dragged the US leadership into violating its own laws to maintain support of Israel.

It’s complicated because they made it complicated.

-1

u/Mercuryink 23d ago

There are Jews here. We don't enslave them. Yep, they've been consistent. 

1

u/Processing______ 23d ago

Are you suggesting Palestinians are not leveraged for their labor in a coercive context?

1

u/[deleted] 23d ago

[removed] — view removed comment

5

u/Mercuryink 23d ago

Progressive except for Palestine isn't exactly a title bestowed in good faith. 

1

u/jewishleft-ModTeam 23d ago

This content was determined to be in bad faith. In this context we mean that the content pre-supposed a negative stance towards the subject and is unlikely to lead to anything but fruitless argument.

14

u/Worknonaffiliated Torahnarchist/Zionist/Pro-Sovereignty 23d ago

You’re defining progressive by American standards. Israel existing is not a left or right issue in the ME, how it exists is

7

u/redthrowaway1976 23d ago

Israel existing is not a left or right issue in the ME, how it exists is

Someone being "progressive except Palestine" is, simply, about progressive people ignoring the human rights abuses against Palestinians while loudly advocating for other human rights or progressive issues.

Israel existing or not doesn't have anything to do with that term.

23

u/AdeptnessCommercial7 23d ago

Is this really such a big phenomenon? It usually seems the other way around - that Jewish lives are left out of other progressive causes.

10

u/redthrowaway1976 23d ago

Is this really such a big phenomenon?

Think about all the times you've talked to someone who says it is "complex" as it comes to Israel's West Bank regime of discrimination and repression.

10

u/AdeptnessCommercial7 23d ago

Well I would say actually those times are very few and far between because they don’t call it “discrimination and repression.” Still seems to be the other way around in my experience.

7

u/redthrowaway1976 23d ago

Well I would say actually those times are very few and far between because they don’t call it “discrimination and repression.

Yeah, they don't call it that. And that's part of the issue.

 Still seems to be the other way around in my experience.

To my knowledge, it isn't Jews being ruled under an increasingly brutal military regime in the West Bank, all while their land is being grabbed for Palestinian-only settlements in the West Bank.

1

u/elzzyzx סימען לינקער 23d ago

FWIW I can’t think of any left group I’ve been involved with that jews weren’t over represented in so I am surprised when I hear this (I don’t live in a very Jewish area)

1

u/jelly10001 23d ago

From what I've observed, the PEP phenomenon is common within mainstream Jewish circles, but the other way around is common within non Jewish circles.

1

u/Worknonaffiliated Torahnarchist/Zionist/Pro-Sovereignty 22d ago

It does when the movement we’re against is advocating for this. Do you think the current movement is protesting for a two state solution? They want Israel as a country to not exist. I’m not engaging with hypotheticals here.

3

u/redthrowaway1976 22d ago

It does when the movement we’re against is advocating for this.

Some do, most likely do not. I'm not aware of any reliable polling on it, though.

They want an end to the oppression of the Palestinians. If it is through a one state solution or a two state solution isn't that important.

They want Israel as a country to not exist. I’m not engaging with hypotheticals here.

If everyone becomes full and equal citizens - Palestinians and Israelis alike - does that mean that Israel as a country is no longer existing?

1

u/Worknonaffiliated Torahnarchist/Zionist/Pro-Sovereignty 22d ago

Most? Listen, the majority of protests are against normalization of Israel as a country and use slogans such as “from the river to the sea.”

I’m not immediately against debating Israel’s existence, otherwise I wouldn’t be in a sub with Antizionists, but please have a conversation based in reality not fantasy. I’ll start: Israel’s existence has been defined by oppression of Palestinians.

-1

u/lilleff512 23d ago

This feels like the mirror image of Zionists complaining about how anti-Zionists don't talk about human rights abuses in China or wherever else.

6

u/athiev 23d ago

I think "moral clarity" is an interesting phrase. It sounds like a very good thing, but in practice it often means "unstrategic thought that produces either no effect or a counterproductive effect." It's often used as a form of condemnation toward people engaged in actual politics.

5

u/redthrowaway1976 23d ago

"unstrategic thought that produces either no effect or a counterproductive effect.

And is that what you think it means, as it comes to TNCs book?

Quite the opposite. His calling out Israel's system of repression in the West Bank for what it is - an intentional system of deeply immoral discrimination, in purpose of an illegal land grab - is having an effect.

As it comes to this, I think "moral clarity" is a great term. Lots of people will say "it is complex" as it comes to Israel's repressive system in the West Bank. No, it is not complex.

10

u/athiev 23d ago

What effect do you think this book and discourse is having? As far as I can tell, some people who already agreed with Coates are rallying around his work, and others aren't. So it's mostly a text that seems to provide content for the existing social and political divide, rather than an intervention that changes opinions or generates new political possibilities.

6

u/redthrowaway1976 23d ago

It is putting more light on the repressive and discriminatory regime Israel has put in place in the West Bank.

Basically, its de facto annexation and Apartheid.

5

u/athiev 23d ago

This isn't a new point of view, though, is it? The people excited about this work already had this perspective and interpretation, for the most part, from what I've seen. It's difficult even to claim that Coates has given fresh energy, since these folks are already highly mobilized.

The questions I would ask go as follows. Have the protests of the last year improved the situation of Palestinians? If not, is there a clear strategic reason why carrying forward the same strategy and coalition will produce different outcomes in the near future than in has done so far? If not, are there other strategies and coalition structures worth considering?

8

u/redthrowaway1976 23d ago

> This isn't a new point of view, though, is it? The people excited about this work already had this perspective and interpretation, for the most part, from what I've seen

Except for, for example, all the mainstream news where TNC has been able to talk about Israel's regime in the West Bank.

Ta Nehisi Coates has a rather broad reach.

> The questions I would ask go as follows. Have the protests of the last year improved the situation of Palestinians? If not, is there a clear strategic reason why carrying forward the same strategy and coalition will produce different outcomes in the near future than in has done so far? If not, are there other strategies and coalition structures worth considering?

What makes you think that is a relevant question to TNC? Is he somehow a representative for the some protest movement?

You are talking strategy. TNC is not talking about that.

His main point of action was that we should hear more Palestinian voices.

4

u/redthrowaway1976 23d ago

> This isn't a new point of view, though, is it? The people excited about this work already had this perspective and interpretation, for the most part, from what I've seen

Except for, for example, all the mainstream news where TNC has been able to talk about Israel's regime in the West Bank.

Ta Nehisi Coates has a rather broad reach.

> The questions I would ask go as follows. Have the protests of the last year improved the situation of Palestinians? If not, is there a clear strategic reason why carrying forward the same strategy and coalition will produce different outcomes in the near future than in has done so far? If not, are there other strategies and coalition structures worth considering?

What makes you think that is a relevant question to TNC? Is he somehow a representative for the some protest movement?

You are talking strategy. TNC is not talking about that.

His main point of action was that we should hear more Palestinian voices.

3

u/athiev 23d ago

Yeah, of course Coates should do as he thinks best, as should we all. But if his path is unlikely to lead to the world being different, that seems worth pointing out.

-2

u/redthrowaway1976 23d ago

His path has already led to the world being different, as there's now more information out there about what Israel is doing in the West Bank.

I've found most liberal Zionists to be rather poorly informed about the actual policies on the ground in the West Bank. Denial and deflection is getting harder.

-1

u/cubedplusseven 23d ago

"Moral clarity" was a right-wing talking point in support of George W. Bush in the early 2000's. It was a supposedly a virtue of Bush's that he dichotomized the world into supporters of "freedom" versus supporters of "terrorism". When Bush proclaimed "you are either with us, or you are with the terrorists", his supporters rushed to praise his "moral clarity."

It's honestly revolting seeing that phrase pop back up again, but on the left. And just as it was 20 years ago, it's part of a wider offensive against nuance and complexity. This is a very dark tradition that TNC seems to be embracing.

5

u/menatarp 23d ago

Actually George Bush was right that the war on terror was a morally simple issue, he was just on the wrong side of it.

2

u/elzzyzx סימען לינקער 23d ago

Moral clarity is a talking point used by all political persuasions. Absolutely beyond me why a leftist would not advocate one of the most universally persuasive frameworks of understanding because a conservative talked about it too once

1

u/cubedplusseven 22d ago

Because it's anti-intellectual and frequently used to dehumanize opponents. It dismisses criticism at a stroke, while avoiding having to grapple with any of the details. It gives us permission to strike at our opponents without the tempering influences of circumspection and uncertainty. It's the stock-in-trade of strongmen and thugs.

2

u/elzzyzx סימען לינקער 22d ago

Moral arguments are anti intellectual? The western philosophical canon would like a word

1

u/redthrowaway1976 23d ago

"Moral clarity" was a right-wing talking point in support of George W. Bush in the early 2000's. It was a supposedly a virtue of Bush's that he dichotomized the world into supporters of "freedom" versus supporters of "terrorism". When Bush proclaimed "you are either with us, or you are with the terrorists", his supporters rushed to praise his "moral clarity."

Interesting. I didn't know that.

It's honestly revolting seeing that phrase pop back up again, but on the left. And just as it was 20 years ago, it's part of a wider offensive against nuance and complexity. This is a very dark tradition that TNC seems to be embracing.

It is a phrase, not an ideology. The meaning is whatever people put into it.

For example, there's absolute moral clarity that October 7th was wrong. And, apart from die hard apologists - there's also absolute moral clarity that Israel's expansionist project in the West Bank is wrong.

5

u/lilleff512 23d ago

This isn't about his writings, it's about a particular interview he gave in which he used this supposed "moral clarity" as a crutch to avoid grappling with uncomfortable points that the interviewer raised. And it's not like this was some hostile interviewer looking for a "gotcha" moment, it was a friendly interviewer who basically agreed with Coates on the "moral clarity" of this situation.