It is difficult for me to imagine an action which would make the pro-Palestine movement seem more like a gang of petulant, irascible thugs. (Presciently, in his acceptance speech Hunter observed that "We are living in an age of bullies.")
This is not inherently a bad move. It's worked quite well for Islamists who want to enforce their blasphemy code. This seems to have no impact on the view of Muslims on the left because, perversely, the more specific a form of dysfunction to a group the more that group has to be defended or ignored lest the racists use it. I understand why someone would assume they'd continue to humiliate themselves in the same manner over Palestine.
You can cow people, especially in-group members, with a mix of thuggish tactics and immunity to PR concerns.
What this actually makes me want to do is learn more than the absolute barest skeleton of early Zionism because I was wondering how much of these claims that it's not fun, never going to catch on etc. would seem credible there too, given an early enough cutoff.
If you're Russell Brand, or Andrew Tate or some other famous alleged sex pest facing a day in court for your crimes from a decade ago, what's your ideal non-extradition spot nowadays?
Russia used to be a refuge but maybe the war has made that untenable in people's eyes. So where do you head today instead of hanging around the US claiming The System is trying to take you out?
Well, they're not sold on this. A mix of comparisons to South Africa and a general belief (convenient, I suppose, if you're an Arab) that the Israeli state is a mere product of Western support and will disappear like a mirage without it gives them reason to hope a loss of support will be fatal.
In the long run, with a nuclear Iran supporting Hezbollah and Hamas, is it impossible?
More options
Context Copy link