The Issue is Never the Issue

In the swirling sea of American protest culture, where passionate voices clash and causes collide, one stark paradox stands out: the irony within leftist movements. From rallying against corporate greed while clutching smartphones to decrying global warming at climate conferences, the irony runs deep. But amidst this seeming contradiction lies a complex narrative of ideals versus reality, where even the most fervent activists find themselves in a circular firing squad, continually narrowing their focus until their demands become nearly impossible to achieve.

One poignant example of this complexity is found within what I call "The Palestine Collective." My critique extends beyond the absurd blockades on college campuses, where activists not only push for their cause but also demand free food, water, shelter, and heat from their peers and professors. However, my main point of contention delves deeper into the mindset of American activists who have grown up benefiting from a Lockean liberal society.

The American liberal perspective on human rights, which questions the morality of collective punishment, seems to align with the claims of Gazans. Yet, these activists often view the world through a Rousseauian lens, where civil rights take precedence over individual or "natural" rights. This seemingly minor contradiction is evident in the confusion of some college students striving to be "on the right side of history," yet many of them unknowingly embrace individualism—the very worldview they claim to detest.

In contexts where individual rights are not prioritized, collective punishment can appear justified. For instance, Pakistan expelled 1.7 million Afghan refugees following a series of terrorist attacks, despite only a few such incidents occurring. The Pakistani population largely supported this action, illustrating a worldview distinct from the American concept of human rights. This is not an argument for exporting moralistic views through military intervention but rather a recognition that non-liberal societies are often willing to engage in collective punishment.

Activists who prioritize civil rights over individual rights inherently prioritize the collective above all else. Their worldview diverges significantly from the American emphasis on individual justice. To them, Israel's responses should seem expected. This internal contradiction underscores their worldview. Perhaps the single biggest reason such a sudden vehement support for Palestine shouldn't come as unexpected, even though it contradicts their views, is because the issue is never the issue.

I have an experiment to propose to you. Surely, we all know a few people ranting and raving on social media about Gaza and Palestine. Take a moment and look through their post history, search their tweets, shares, and stories for one word: “Yemen.” Having conducted this experiment myself, I can confidently say that in about 5% of pro-Palestine accounts were there search results in return to “Yemen.” Most of the people going on about the Palestine issue don't really seem to care much at all about “suffering Muslims” as they claim because they don't care when Saudi Arabia is doing it. The reason being, it is possible, however harder, to create a progressive argument to blame the West. Sure, they could say Saudi Arabia is an oil nation that is a proxy in the pocket of the United States, but this takes far longer to radicalize the populace. This is where the real issue lies. They do not care at all because they do not see Saudi Arabia as an extension of the West as they see Israel, not unreasonably. Israel was set up by Britain in 1948 as a result of the Balfour Declaration after decades of petitioning to the Palestinian owning British at the time. It is not unreasonable to say that Israel is a product of the West. It is my belief that this is the main reason why this issue is in the news, dominating every geo-political headline, while something like Yemen is not.

The activists view Israel as a “white” nation. They chant death to America while protesting for “civil rights.” This underpins their disdain for the West. It is an attempt to undermine the West in order to bring about the revolution. Ultimately, beneath the surface of each protest lies a strategic narrative aimed at challenging and destabilizing Western nations. The issue at hand becomes a means to an end—an opportunity to critique and undermine perceived injustices rooted in Western influence. This realization prompts a deeper reflection on the motivations and implications of modern activism, urging us to consider not just the issues themselves but the broader agendas that drive them.