By Pamela Paul
Why were pro-Palestinian demonstrators at Columbia University shouting “NYPD, KKK,” and why did the Movement for Black Lives call for “an immediate end to Israel’s deadly settler-colonial project”? Moreover, how did perceptions shift so rapidly regarding Israel — even prior to its military response — following the Hamas attack on October 7, 2023?
If these questions leave you pondering, you might benefit from reading two brief new publications.
You might be familiar with one of them, “The Message” by Ta-Nehisi Coates, which was released this month and has already become a bestseller. Coates, the award-winning author of “Between the World and Me,” qualifies as a significant figure on the left, especially fitting for someone who has penned multiple Black Panther comics.
The second book, “On Settler Colonialism: Ideology, Violence, and Justice,” authored by poet and critic Adam Kirsch, has attracted considerably less attention. While Coates’ work illuminates the moral urgency underpinning the pro-Palestinian movement, Kirsch’s offers insight into how its foundational ideology took hold among elite circles over two decades, only to erupt into broader public consciousness on October 7.
“For numerous scholars and activists, categorizing Israel as a settler-colonial entity provided justification for the Hamas attack,” Kirsch articulates, “as for them, the term encapsulates a comprehensive set of ideological beliefs — regarding Israel and Palestine, as well as historical and various social and political matters, from environmental issues to gender to capitalism. In fact, comprehending contemporary progressive politics is impossible without understanding settler colonialism and the perspective it creates.”
If college students read anything today, “The Message” is likely to resonate with many. However, if an academic institution were to choose one book to assign this year, I would advocate for Kirsch’s — if only for the sake of context.
Context is precisely what has been noted as absent by critics of “The Message.” The book consists of four essays, including accounts of journeys to Senegal and a school district in South Carolina where “Between the World and Me” has been prohibited. However, it is the lengthiest section on Israel and Palestine that has faced the most backlash, particularly for excluding references to the suicide bombings during the Second Intifada, Hamas, or the events of October 7.
These omissions, along with the lack of a present-day pro-Israeli viewpoint, are deliberate choices made by Coates. He expresses no interest in “considering both perspectives” — “regardless of how respectfully presented, no matter how skillfully articulated.” As he states, “My framework deliberately excluded any justification for the evidently immoral.”
“On Settler Colonialism” elucidates the rationale behind this refusal. According to Kirsch, settler colonialist theory posits that any regime established against the wishes of the indigenous populace is inherently illegitimate; no counterargument can dispute that fundamental truth. The connections Coates establishes in “The Message” from Senegal to American slavery to Trump’s America to Israel align with the same ideology that links America’s conquest of Native American populations to efforts aimed at subjugating Indigenous people globally. Under settler colonialist theory, “colonial America” encompasses not just the 18th century, but also contemporary Americans inhabiting Indigenous lands.
From this standpoint, it’s a short leap to the Middle East, where Israel is positioned as the colonial settler and Palestinians are seen as the oppressed. In this historical interpretation, “occupation” extends beyond just right-wing settlers in the West Bank, encompassing Israel’s very existence.
Such an interpretation fosters a stark moral dichotomy. In Coates’ narrative, Israelis perceive Palestinians as “savage Nazis, third-world barbarians, embodying the corrupted native in the colonial psyche — The Aztec. The Indian. The Zulu. The Arab.” Across the divide from a Black American such as himself, Coates recognizes “the warmth of solidarity, of ‘conquered peoples,’ as one of my comrades described it, connecting across oceans and disparate experiences.”
On this side of the Atlantic, settler colonialist theory found fertile ground within a curriculum that has often prioritized theoretical frameworks over specific dates and events. History majors today may focus on thematic areas like Comparative Colonialism or Race and Ethnicity, rather than Early European History or Modern Chinese History, for example. This ideological framework tends to selectively acknowledge historical facts to serve a particular argument.
However, this doesn’t imply that this approach lacks valid arguments. For instance, in “The Message,” Coates highlights the real conflict between the principles of democracy, which rely on equality among diverse society members, and the Jewish state of Israel, which favors followers of one religion over others.
But as he critiques the status quo, Coates never offers a viable alternative. For a supposedly progressive movement, the pro-Palestinian cause doesn’t clarify what progress may entail. Kirsch observes, “In the context of settler colonialism, the inability to clearly envision a decolonial future ought to act as a cautionary sign.”
This brings us to the most disheartening aspect of settler colonialist theory in practice. Activists and organizations may issue increasingly loud land acknowledgments, yet no one is genuinely proposing to return the United States to Native Americans. Similarly, if the slogan “From the river to the sea” is taken literally, what does that signify for Israeli Jews, many of whom were displaced not only from Europe and Russia but also from neighboring Muslim countries? The ideology of settler colonialism offers little more than a bleak deadlock, a belief that “history is malevolent and ought to be undone,” or what Kirsch aptly describes as a “yearning for redemptive destruction.”
In their mutual opposition to arriving at a conclusion, an ironic parallel surfaces between the “free Palestine” movement and Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu’s administration, which has refrained from proposing a feasible resolution for the ongoing conflict. It appears that neither faction can discern a practical solution that can claim absolute justice. What endures, in the absence of this, are resentment and hopelessness.
