Israel-Hamas War 2023

[Tamas]

https://mondoweiss.net/2023/11/on-the-history-meaning-and-power-of-from-the-river-to-the-sea/

we dreamed with Palestinians of freedom because we know that none of us will be free until Palestine is free.

 

[garbon]

I liked your article.  It made sense.  People don't put a lot of thought into protest slogans.  They get jacked up and start shouting them if someone else does.  But now they've had some time to think about what it means and possibly realized that a group that is claiming victimhood and demanding third party assistance doesn't maximize compassion by chanting about kicking all the Jews out of the area.  I certainly haven't heard it being chanted a great deal since the beginning.

Sort of but this bit and their ending anecdote makes it clear they aren't happy about that. As in they'll happy go back to it if they could get round Israel's fear mongering to Jewish audiences.

Activists should note this reality. If one of our goals is to move Jewish American audiences, we need to recognize that the Israeli state and its allies have found it easy to weaponize this particular slogan in order to incite fear among Jews. 

Most of us, including myself, were not aware of the earlier moments of this slogan's history or its various shades of meaning in different contexts. And that doesn't really matter. More important than this history was the buoyant mood of the motley crowds as we sang.

[Josquius]

Leaving aside the question of whether or not Palestinians or Western Arabs are "progessive," yes, it makes perfect sense that people who feel oppressed will feel violence is their best option.  That has been true of the vast majority of independence movements throughout history and of "people's revolutions" such as the French and Russian revolutions.  You can count the Gandhis and Mandelas of the world on one hand.Only two interpretations of the chant have been mentioned.  One makes the Arabs look good and one makes them look bad.  It is not illogical to believe one has higher probability if there is evidence suggesting that is so.

I don't see how its relevant whether Arabs are progressive or not.
This is a common attack line from the right which completely misses the point.
The protestors don't want rights for Palestinians because of any special feature of them. There's no naiive idea that they're helping "their side".
They want rights for Palestinians because they're people.

I have no idea how people picked it up from Hamas.  Probably the same way you imagine they picked it up from some 1948 PR statement no one has ever heard of before.

I liked your article.  It made sense.  People don't put a lot of thought into protest slogans.  They get jacked up and start shouting them if someone else does.  But now they've had some time to think about what it means and possibly realized that a group that is claiming victimhood and demanding third party assistance doesn't maximize compassion by chanting about kicking all the Jews out of the area.  I certainly haven't heard it being chanted a great deal since the beginning.

As said I agree people should think a bit more strategically about what they're chanting and find something less vague.
But the discussion here wasn't whether its a clever chant or anything like that, it was whether its a chant for wiping out Israel and Palestine ruling over the entire region.

[Admiral Yi]

I don't see how its relevant whether Arabs are progressive or not.
This is a common attack line from the right which completely misses the point.
The protestors don't want rights for Palestinians because of any special feature of them. There's no naiive idea that they're helping "their side".
They want rights for Palestinians because they're people.

Dude, you're the one who brought it up.  Maybe you need to go back and read the post I was responding to.

As said I agree people should think a bit more strategically about what they're chanting and find something less vague.
But the discussion here wasn't whether its a clever chant or anything like that, it was whether its a chant for wiping out Israel and Palestine ruling over the entire region.

It's the same discussion.  It's not a clever chant *because* it sounds like they want to wipe out Israel.

[Tamas]

One problem I have is that "it sounds like that but it was not meant that way" is a bog standard right-wing excuse for a lot of their racist/fascist talk that we do not hesitate to call BS on. So let's stop the dishonest fig-leafing of the fact that it's a chant created by anti-semitic would-be genociders and picked up by ignorant useful idiots who like it because it rhymes and has the word "free" in it.

[Josquius]

Dude, you're the one who brought it up.  Maybe you need to go back and read the post I was responding to.

What?
No I didn't?
You're the only one bringing up the views of Arabs in this. I was talking about the Pro-Palestine protestors.

It's the same discussion.  It's not a clever chant *because* it sounds like they want to wipe out Israel.

Completely disagree. Its clever (from the POV of those who want to wipe out Israel) as its vague enough it could be spun their way though would also be believed by most to be perfectly innocent thus allowing it to be easily picked up by people who have no interest in killing anyone.
Its also a dumb chant to use for the sane pro-Palestinian movement for the same reasons of vagueness and the potential for nutters to jump on board, and for opponents to paint it as being entirely about the nutters.

One problem I have is that "it sounds like that but it was not meant that way" is a bog standard right-wing excuse for a lot of their racist/fascist talk that we do not hesitate to call BS on. So let's stop the dishonest fig-leafing of the fact that it's a chant created by anti-semitic would-be genociders and picked up by ignorant useful idiots who like it because it rhymes and has the word "free" in it.

We're talking about basically the complete inverse situation here.
Less regular people "Oh that sounds a bit killy" and its users going "no wait actually its not!" and more
regular people going "That sounds completely innocent" and then opponents going "no wait actually its a call for genocide!"

Is the origin of the expression a cunning design by the anti-semites specifically to appeal to moderate people and get them sort of onside? Perhaps? Its semantic origins certainly come from Jewish and then Arab calling for death and destruction.
But is that how it is actually meant by most of the people using it? Absolutely not. The change in the wording specifically removes the killing.

[crazy canuck]

One problem I have is that "it sounds like that but it was not meant that way" is a bog standard right-wing excuse for a lot of their racist/fascist talk that we do not hesitate to call BS on. So let's stop the dishonest fig-leafing of the fact that it's a chant created by anti-semitic would-be genociders and picked up by ignorant useful idiots who like it because it rhymes and has the word "free" in it.

I think you have it backwards, Hamas did not pick up the chant until decades after it was created

[Josquius]

This is quite a depressing minor story. Sure to help build some anti semitism.
Finding from the river to the sea offensive ok fair enough. But the Palestinian flag?...


https://amp.theguardian.com/football/2024/mar/11/fa-to-ask-amateur-football-club-to-remove-palestine-corner-flags

[crazy canuck]

Parents are the worst thing about kids sports.  This is sadly not a surprising development.

[Admiral Yi]

What?
No I didn't?
You're the only one bringing up the views of Arabs in this. I was talking about the Pro-Palestine protestors.

If you meant the white protestors it would have been so much simpler to just say the white protestors.

Completely disagree. Its clever (from the POV of those who want to wipe out Israel) as its vague enough it could be spun their way though would also be believed by most to be perfectly innocent thus allowing it to be easily picked up by people who have no interest in killing anyone.
Its also a dumb chant to use for the sane pro-Palestinian movement for the same reasons of vagueness and the potential for nutters to jump on board, and for opponents to paint it as being entirely about the nutters.

This is a carbon copy of defund the police.  Someone shouts something stupid and self destructive at a protest and someone has to rush to their defense telling us how we've got it all wrong.

[Josquius]

If you meant the white protestors it would have been so much simpler to just say the white protestors.

I mean the protestors.
Looking at photos of the protests most of them do indeed seem to be white, but I don't see where this is particularly relevant.
Certainly we're talking about protestors in western countries with the English slogan of from the river to the sea, Palestine will be free. Not people in the middle east who will also have views on the issue and separate Arabic slogans.

This is a carbon copy of defund the police.  Someone shouts something stupid and self destructive at a protest and someone has to rush to their defense telling us how we've got it all wrong.

No.
Defund the police on the surface is dumb and must be explained with its context and what it means in practice to make sense.
Palestine will be free on the surface is hard to disagree with and must be explained with its context and related historic phrases to sound frightening- and dumb for the desires of many of those saying it.

[Tamas]

Maybe basic geography needs to be explained for "from the river to the sea", sure, but it's not a very elaborate concept otherwise. And again, best defense the chanters have is ignorance and stupidity, which is never a good look.

[Josquius]

Maybe basic geography needs to be explained for "from the river to the sea", sure, but it's not a very elaborate concept otherwise. And again, best defense the chanters have is ignorance and stupidity, which is never a good look.

The basic geography is well understood. The Jordan River and Med are standout natural borders for the region of Palestine.
The issue is some are reading a unwritten "The only freedom is national border expansion. All inclusive. Destroy the Jews" whilst others see nothing of the sort and recognise one people's freedom doesn't have to come at the expense of another.

[Tamas]

Maybe basic geography needs to be explained for "from the river to the sea", sure, but it's not a very elaborate concept otherwise. And again, best defense the chanters have is ignorance and stupidity, which is never a good look.

The basic geography is well understood. The Jordan River and Med are standout natural borders for the region of Palestine.
The issue is some are reading a unwritten "The only freedom is national border expansion. All inclusive. Destroy the Jews" whilst others see nothing of the sort and recognise one people's freedom doesn't have to come at the expense of another.

Here's a map to support your "natural borders of Palestine" thing:


You can surely note from the Jordan river to the sea that's largely called Israel, not Palestine. So saying that within those boundaries "Palestine" will be "free" clearly implies that Israel is what keeping Palestine un-free.

And the reason for all these explanations isn't that without these explanations the chant seems innocent. It is the exact opposite. The chant is clearly and openly malicious, it is attempts like yours to hand-wave that obvious undertone away what makes it necessary to highlight the obvious facts around it. The dishonesty is entirely on the "pro-chant" side on this one.

[Admiral Yi]

Palestine will be free on the surface is hard to disagree with and must be explained with its context and related historic phrases to sound frightening- and dumb for the desires of many of those saying it.

From the river to the sea, Palestine will be free is very easy to disagree with.  If Palestine exists, free or not, from the river to the sea, Israel will not exist, since it is located between the river and the sea.