| Title | : | Except for Palestine: The Limits of Progressive Politics |
| Author | : | |
| Rating | : | |
| ISBN | : | 1620975920 |
| ISBN-10 | : | 9781620975923 |
| Language | : | English |
| Format Type | : | Hardcover |
| Number of Pages | : | 227 |
| Publication | : | First published February 16, 2021 |
In this major work of daring criticism and analysis, scholar and political commentator Marc Lamont Hill and Israel-Palestine expert Mitchell Plitnick spotlight how holding fast to one-sided and unwaveringly pro-Israel policies reflects the truth-bending grip of authoritarianism on both Israel and the United States. Except for Palestine deftly argues that progressives and liberals who oppose regressive policies on immigration, racial justice, gender equality, LGBTQ rights, and other issues must extend these core principles to the oppression of Palestinians. In doing so, the authors take seriously the political concerns and well-being of both Israelis and Palestinians, demonstrating the extent to which U.S. policy has made peace harder to attain. They also unravel the conflation of advocacy for Palestinian rights with anti-Semitism and hatred of Israel.
Hill and Plitnick provide a timely and essential intervention by examining multiple dimensions of the Israeli-Palestinian conversation, including Israel's growing disdain for democracy, the effects of occupation on Palestine, the siege of Gaza, diminishing American funding for Palestinian relief, and the campaign to stigmatize any critique of Israeli occupation. Except for Palestine is a searing polemic and a cri de coeur for elected officials, activists, and everyday citizens alike to align their beliefs and politics with their values.
Except for Palestine: The Limits of Progressive Politics Reviews
-
Marc Lamont Hill's I/P conflict takes are usually tone-deaf so my hopes for this book were low but this wasn’t as bad as other stuff he's said in the past. I'll start off with some general comments before getting into everything, let’s go!
Except for Palestine claims that American progressives treat Palestinians exceptionally by allowing unprogressive policy towards them. However, when I think about the entire MENA region and American policy, it seems progressives pay more attention to the I/P conflict than to other conflicts. Not updated to 2021, but who's really exceptional here for progressives?
Either way, approaching American policy in regards to I/P without discussing American policy in the Middle East seems wrong. America doesn't inherently care about the lives of Palestinians or Israelis. This is about power, it's about Russia and China and Iran. It's about the Cold War and radical Islam and imperialism and oil and capitalism. Which, okay, Israel gains by being "on America's side" in the Middle East but analyzing American foreign policy about I/P without looking at the broader connection to the Middle East seems misleading and methodologically flawed. Why is support for Israel mostly bi-partisan? That can't be answered without looking at American interests in the entire MENA region.
Beyond this, it's unclear who’s the target audience. It seems like it's meant for American progressives who don't know much about Palestine but the authors assume much prior knowledge. How many Americans know what big historical event happened in 1973, what the second intifada was and why Oslo failed? Heck, how many know where the Golan is?
For those who are familiar with the conflict, this book just doesn't say much. I honestly expected the takes here to be spicier (like Hill’s interviews). This is as bland as Democrat economic policy. My Shabbat dinners have edgier takes.
As always, it becomes painfully clear that Israelis weren't really spoken to. So here I am, ready to explain what this book misses, chapter by chapter (there are only four so it’s feasible). Putting it in spoiler tags to make it more organized!
Israel's Right to Exist
Criminalizing BDS
American Policy
Gaza
Conclusion
What I'm Taking With Me
- they also blame Israel for the bad relations with various Arab countries?? Tell me, what has Israel done to Libya? The Arab League has been boycotting Israel far before the 1967 occupation and frankly, doesn’t care about Palestinians.
- Also, it's pretty much a given that Israel cooperates with Egypt and Jordan far more than is publicly known.
- I like writing these long reviews cause looking back at this is going to be a lot of fun. Also, way better than doing math.
- I suspect Plitnick reined in some of Hill's ideas and added the academic nuances.
- I wonder if anyone got through reading the entire review and if one day I'll work in politics and feel everything here is wrong. -
“U.S. policy in Israel-Palestine rests upon decades of decisions that have been supported, either through active endorsement or silent complicity, by the American Left. No American president has been an exception in this regard.” (pg 8)
Hill and Plitnick are obviously writing to a well informed demographic in the U.S. which, I’m sorry to say, is very, very small. This book, as wonderfully written as it is, seems to be anchored on two rather shaky assumptions. The first is that the average American has at least a rudimentary knowledge of Israel’s socio-economic framing and, secondly, that American support for Israel comes from a place of empathy and Semitic concern. I’m not sure either of those suppositions are entirely accurate.
There are, however, two important points that Hill, Plitnick, and I agree on. The first is that, when it comes to support for the Palestinian people, the American far-right is a lost cause. The second point of congruence is that liberal and progressive Americans have been shamefully apathetic.
“With the rise of anti-Semitism in the United States, Europe, and elsewhere, Jewish people everywhere need and deserve solidarity with liberals to survive. But if that solidarity comes at the expense of another people, it is ultimately self-defeating.” (pg 158) -
I had the chance to read an advanced copy of this book thanks to #netgalley and I'm so thankful I did. The book is so well researched, straight to the point and asks the most daring of questions; why is it that the liberals of the US, both private citizens and public officials alike, call for justice and peace everywhere in the world "Except for Palestine". Why is it that when it comes to the lives and basic human rights of Palestinians does the world suddenly turn a blind eye? My personal opinion is that Israel can give master classes in spinning realities and controlling the public narrative but after reading the book you may have your own opinions on the subject but one thing is for sure, it won't leave you indifferent to the topic. This book forms a bold call to action, a wake up call of sorts, to the realities of people who were made into refugees on their own land. Hats off to Marc and Mitchell on this work!
-
The Palestinians have been refugees for so long, the world has tired of them and pays no attention to their plight. People may be shocked at the treatment of the Rohingya expelled from Burma, or the innumerable escapees from various African horrors, everyone trying desperately to get into Europe, with little or no success. And lately, the Ukrainians have taken top of mind as the latest collection of millions looking to flee a tyrant. The Palestinian problem is an old story, seemingly without solution, but is in many ways worse than the others. Marc Lamont Hill and Mitchell Plitnick try to renew the Palestinians' place in our psyche with their book Except For Palestine.
It is a largely straightforward and top-line history of the founding of Israel and the roadkill that has become the fate of the natives, the Palestinians. It breaks neatly into four chapters, which are telling all by themselves. The first wraps and warps the world around Israel's neurotic "right to exist", which does not apply to Palestine. The second follows the global movement of boycotts, which, naturally are antisemitic despite all logic, law and human rights. The boycotts are often uniquely outlawed by one-of-a-kind laws for that reason. The third collects the madness of the Trump era. It was when all progress was ditched in favor of the US embassy moving to Jerusalem and all pretense of the occupied territories ever returning to their owners evaporated in the desert heat. Lastly, the current state of affairs, as bad and worse than it has ever been, with the usual political hypocrisy stalling any kind of solution at all.
At first, in 1948, the Palestinians were shuffled off their properties and gathered in what amounted to refugee camps in their own lands. As time went on, they lost more and more rights - the right to travel in Israel and visit family, the right to work there, the right to any kind of quality of life and the right to negotiate a free and fair conclusion to their plight. Today, they are worse off than ever, and as long as Israel is sitting across the table with the USA behind it, it will never be resolved.
It might be hard to swallow, but the Palestinians have been in a refugee camp called Gaza for 70 years now. Whole generations have come and gone, lived and died there, unable to go anywhere else. They are stateless, without passports, and no one speaks for them, supports them or is allied with them. From tens of thousands in 1948, there are now about two million in Gaza, in what is always in the top three most densely populated places on Earth (11,702 per square mile - compared to less than 300 for the rest of Israel).
Unemployment is 50%. Only 4% of the water is drinkable. Electricity is rationed for four hours a day. Every time they build up the infrastructure, the Israelis smash it. Every time the United Nations passes a resolution condemning Israel for this treatment of innocent bystanders, it simply ignores it. With solid backing from America, they have no fear. The USA has vetoed 44 resolutions calling Israel to let those people go. And many more have never made it to the voting stage because of the foregone conclusion.
The original problem still holds: to Israelis, this is a zero-sum game, the authors say. Any rights the Palestinians have mean less rights for Israelis. So all rights must be taken away from the natives in order for Israelis to be free. Just this year, it downgraded Arabic from its standing as equally important as Hebrew. Those Palestinians not in the camps are second class citizens in their country. They can be removed from their lands at any time, in favor of Israeli settlers. It is as bad as what America did to its indigenous peoples, isolating them and pushing them away. There is an odious correlation between the two. Others compare it to Apartheid. Both are apt and accurate comparisons in their own way.
The book recounts various failures over the decades, each one a setback for the Palestinians, who call the advent of the Israelis the Nakba - the Disaster. Some of them still hold onto the keys to their old homes in the pointless hope they will be allowed to return and pick up where they left off. The trends and events covered include the infighting among political factions of the Palestinians, borne of the frustration of getting absolutely nowhere regardless of who represents them. Whether they represent peace talks or violence, the result is the same - fewer rights for Palestinians.
On the Israeli side, the oft-ruling Likud Party has a plank in its platform strictly against giving the Palestinians their own state. This despite the public mouthings of its leaders claiming to support it (because the USA requires it). This is why it goes precisely nowhere.
It is also redolent of the mouthings by lawmakers regarding nuclear weapons. "Everyone knows" Israel has nuclear weapons, but no one is allowed to say so (though it slips out from time to time) because of an American law forbidding aid to nations harboring nuclear weapons. It often seems the whole country is built on deceit. With Palestinians at the bottom.
Palestinians cling to UN principles, treaties and rules like Human Rights and the Right of Return, which Israel will do everything in its power to prevent, because it might diminish the colonizers as a Jewish nation-state. The Israelis consider peaceful co-existence too much of a gamble and it is out of the question. So what else is there? For Israel it seems to be a matter of keeping everyone caged, shrinking their space and rights, and hoping the world is too weary to care. So far so good.
Taking a small step towards showing their real opinions, the authors discuss the constant bleating by Israel for everyone to acknowledge its right to exist. No other nations do this, even under fire. It is self-obvious, they say, that countries have the right to exist. But insecure Israel is forever demanding that Palestinians formally agree, and keep requiring it over and over as part of every discussion or negotiation. Failure to agree can get the other party branded as antisemitic. The authors label this a set-up and intellectually dishonest. It reminds me of white women breaking down in tears when accused of racism. That too, works.
There is a by now old saying that Capitol Hill is Israeli-Occupied Territory. It was never more the case than when Trump was president. Not only did he move the American embassy to Jerusalem, but he blessed Israel's permanent takeover of the Golan Heights, which belong to Syria. Naturally, the Israelis moved right in. (Not to put too fine a point on it, the Israelis immediately built a suburban community in the Golan Heights, called Ramat Trump - Trump Heights - and the US Ambassador inaugurated it.) For good measure, Trump cancelled food and social services aid to Palestinians while increasing military aid to Israel. Whatever became of the Palestinians, Trump obviously did not care. Then, at the end of his term, Trump's son-in-law published his long-awaited roadmap to peace in the middle east. It basically gave Israel everything it wanted, and gave nothing at all to the Palestinians. The best that can be said about the roadmap is that it has been entirely forgotten. It neatly wrapped up the anarchy of the Trump presidency.
So while Except for Palestine might seem biased, the truth is it has been a linear one-way slide to oblivion. There have been no bright spots, no reversals of fortune, no rights recovered thanks to some enlightened leader. There have been none. It is a constant beating, and the book reflects it well.
David Wineberg -
This book is not comprehensive, but if you are looking for something that gets to the point and want to know more about the occupation of Palestine, this is the right book for you. It’s 4 chapters, and each one will give you pretty salient takeaways. The last chapter on Trump’s foreign policy is worth it alone.
-
EXCEPT FOR PALESTINE
Thank you to @thenewpress for the #gifted ARC!
Whenever someone asks “what’s the deal with Israel & Palestine?” I have always responded (somewhat cheekily) “do you have ten hours?” It’s always felt important to give people the history so they can fully grasp how we got to where we are. & no, not “they’ve been fighting over this for 3,000 years” history (anyone who tells you that the two don’t get along because of ‘ancient religious feuds’ should not be listened to) but rather “we need to go back to 1896, 1917, or at least 1948” history.
With this, however, Hill & Plitnick have made my answer a lot simpler. Never, and I mean never, in the seven years I’ve been learning about this topic have I read something as concise & razor-sharp as the scholarship in these 158 pages.
The beauty of this book is that you don’t *need* to know about the roots of Zionism or the details of the 1967 & 1973 wars (though it helps for sure) to recognize the single most important fact: Palestinians deserve equal rights & justice because everyone deserves equal rights & justice. & further, it is high time that people who champion these ideals stop pretending that Palestine can be the exception; there is simply no excuse. In a world where the left is fighting for LGBTQ+ rights, Indigenous land, the climate, racial equity & more, we cannot possibly continue to uphold this violent contradiction in leaving out Palestine.
This is not a “congrats, you’re liberal” feel-good text. It is a necessary reckoning with US actions & complicity--from leaders & citizens on the right & left--in the protracted suffering of Palestinians.
The book is divided into four highly accessible topics: nationalism & the demand on Palestinians to affirm Israel’s right to exist, the Boycott, Divest & Sanction (BDS) movement & the fight to criminalize it, US policy toward Palestine over time, and the crisis in Gaza. -
Marc Lamont Hill and his co-author might claim to be "progressive" - except they aren’t when it comes to Palestine. Then they become a reactionaries. The central thesis of the book is bait and switch.
The book begins with a checklist of items for progressives, opposition to “racism, sexism, religious bigotry, anti-LGBTQIA hate... “. The problem – the society they are attacking, Israel, opposes these prejudices, and the one he is defending, Palestine, maintains them. Queer Palestinians, facing death threats from relatives at home, flock to progressive Israel for sanctuary. Israel is a democracy as its many elections and political parties can attest to. Hill falsely claims that it is not. Not only is it a democracy at the top level, that democracy extends to below the municipal level to a high degree of participation in community councils The last Palestinian election was in 2007 and was marked by members of Fatah and Hamas throwing each other off of rooftops in Gaza.
Progressives support giving refugees asylum and citizenship. But when it comes to Palestinians living in refugee camps in Arab countries for several generations they switch gears and advocate “sending them back where their ancestors came from”, rather than integration into the countries in which they were born.
Palestinian President-For-Life, Mahmoud Abbas is now in the 14th year of a 4 year term and, along with his cronies rules the Palestinian Authority, which is a cover for Fatah. The EU funded parliament building in Abu Dis, as AFP reported last year, lies most empty. For those unfamiliar with the geography of Jerusalem, and Hill can count himself in among them, this location, first proposed by Palestinian ally Saudi Arabia 2 decades ago is the same distance from Al Aqsa/the Temple Mount as the Knesset is, but in the opposite direction. Where do they expect the capital to be built – in the Old City on top of the Church of the Holy Sepulchre or in the Jewish or Armenian Quarters? Or perhaps inside the Al Aqsa Mosque or the Dome of the Rock?
They also falsely claim that the move of America’s embassy and official recognition of Jerusalem as Israel’s capital “caused great controversy”. It didn’t. The Washington Post and New York Times wrote a couple of editorials as did the Guardian. Abbas threatened Arab uprisings across the middle east. No one cared. The PA got a few dozen people to rally in Ramallah. Hamas "Great March" was unrelated - it started several months earlier.
Like the PA, Gaza has been ruled by Hamas’s inner circle which decides their own leadership, sans vox populi. Both are guided by Sharia Law, the PA by Basic Law #4 which also enshrines Arabic (and only Arabic) as the official language, and Hamas by their 1988 Covenant and by their 2017 “new charter” which still calls for the destruction of Israel through violent struggle. In contrast Israel’s framework of Basic Laws are secular in nature and enshrine both Hebrew and Arabic as official languages.
Hill and Plitnick expect an eventual Palestinian state to be both democratic and secular, respecting the rights of women, LGBTQ+ people and minorities. This doesn’t happen elsewhere in the Middle East which is largely governed by conservative Islamic views, and is not matched by polls conducted by the Palestinian Center for Policy and Survey Research. If it was going to happen then it would have happened already, and it hasn’t. As oppressive as these societies can be, what is waiting in the wings tends to be more of the same. Real progressives would be able to recognize this.
In blaming Israel the authors are targeting the wrong party. They make the wrong choice, typical in books of this kind, in thinking that to be pro-Palestinian one has to be be anti-Israel. Nowhere do they praise Israel’s attempts to make peace or efforts to aid and support Palestinians or Arab Israelis. Rule 1 in seeking peace - focus on the positive to bring people together. Preaching hate, as the authors do, will accomplish the opposite.
Aside from dissing Abu Dis, the flim flam men are not very good or truthful with the facts. Perhaps that comes from Hill’s Media Studies background where facts are less important than the perceptions one can create. It’s an unbelievable coincidence that the borders of “ancient Palestine” match that drawn up by the League of Nations. The fact: “Palestine” was a Roman and Christian perception of the territory of ancient Israel and pre-Mandate maps show it to include what is now Jordan and parts of Syria. In Jordan 50-60% of the population including Queen Rania are Palestinian, with 2.1 million considered “refugees” and denied basic rights, which the flim flam men ignore. Similarly Palestinians in the west bank were stripped of their Jordanian citizenship by King Hussein in 1988 – except for top PLO officials who were exempted. Fiction: Palestinians are routinely denied building permits. The fact: In Gaza and in Areas A and B it is Hamas and the PA that issue permits, not Israel, and that covers 95% of Palestinians in the territories. In Area C and in Jerusalem many avoid applying for permits and wind up in violation of municipal guidelines. Of those who do apply for permits the rejection rate is the same for Arabs and non-Arabs. The fiction: Hill plays the race card by claiming that Israeli Jews “fears black and brown hordes”. The fact: nearly 50% of Israelis are as dark or darker skinned than most Palestinians. Because they and their parents came from Arab/Muslim counties where they experienced prejudice and ethnic cleansing, they tend to be conservative in outlook while Jews who migrated from western Europe tend to be more left wing and liberal. The two groups are intermarrying at a high rate so eventually there will be little distinction. America’s problems with race do not translate to Israeli society.
Myth: Israel has faced no existential threat since 1973. The facts: Iran’s IRGC has repeatedly published genocidal threats to destroy Israel in minutes, a threat that can only be carried out using nuclear arms. Hezbollah, Iran’s proxy in Lebanon has promised the same. Iran’s Ayatollah Khameini inaugurated a countdown clock of 25 years to Israel’s destruction. More recently Turkey, which has been building up its military ihas threatened to reconquer Jerusalem. Nor can one dismiss the possibility of new regimes in Jordan and Egypt renouncing their peace treaties or the potential threat of Saudi Arabia which possesses the 5th largest armed force on the planet. Egypt is 6th and Israel is 17th. And then there is Hamas and the PA who have threatened yet another intifadeh, an existenstial threat through asymetrical war.
Myth: Anti-boycott legislation “criminalizes” BDS (Blame, Distort and Slander). The fact: BDS advocates seek to make the US government complicit in their anti-Israel campaign. It has nothing to do with free speech. Personally you may boycott Israeli produces, as wrongheaded as this may be. If your business excludes Jews or Israelis or employs guilt by association with companies that do business in Israel you won’t be prosecuted in criminal court – you’ll be denied access to government contracts. Ironic – those who would boycott cry “foul” when they in turn are boycotted.
Myth: BDS opposes violence and is not antisemitic. The facts: At the Sept 2018 USCPR Conference Hill endorsed terrorism “Leilah Khaled style” - she was convicted of hijacking two civilian passenger airplanes, Hill also claimed (falsely) that Israel was “poisoning the water” of Palestinians a classic antisemitic allegation. He endorsed terror by stating that “we can’t fetishize that (non-violent) strategy”. He gaslights readers by claiming that the phrase “from the river to the sea” does not mean Israel’s destruction.
BDS advocates have targeted and terrorized Jewish student directly by posting mock eviction notices on their dorm rooms and by scheduling divestment votes on Jewish holidays and the Sabbath, often on short notice and at times that when observant Jews would be unable to attend and voice their opinion. BDS routinely lies by claiming “victories” such as when Renaldinho and his Brazilian team mates backed out of a 2018 exhibition match in Israel due to death threats against the players. The event was rescheduled and took place in October 2019.
Hill and Plitnick also promote the “deadly exchange” conspiracy theory that Israeli police anti-terrorism training exchanges, which has nothing to do with arrest procedures such as those that led to the death of Geroge Floyd. The program has been highly praised for its emphasis on community relations.
If one were to refute all the mistakes it would take twice as many pages as the book contains. But one doesn’t need to go that far. The very first misrepresentation is in the dedication.
To Ahmed Erekat, a beautiful spirit stolen from the world two weeks before his wedding.
Erekat was killed after ramming his car into an Israeli checkpoint on June 23rd, 2020. Instead of pulling over when flagged by the female officer he increased his speed, swerved, and tried to kill her. Undeniable. Recorded on video.
If the flim flam men are committed to non-violence – they hide it very well. -
thanks The New Press for the e-copy!
In four essays, Except for Palestine explores four issues: The Right to Exist, Criminalizing BDS, Trumped-Up Policy, and The Crisis in Gaza, with the overarching point of showing how the United States has continually supported Israel’s occupation, irrespective of the political party of the politicians in office.
I have a lot of conflicting feelings about this book, because I walked away from it with a lot of vocabulary and context that I was missing before, and I am glad I read it when I did. I believe that, as a whole, this provided a good overview of why more Americans should support the Palestinian cause, and how bipartisan support of Israel in the United States is clearly tied to Palestinian suffering. But, it was a frustrating reading experience for me. It did not meet my expectations based on the title and blurb, and it ultimately would have benefited from a clearer audience and purpose, and better organization.
Since it was a book of essays, they were mainly focused on giving just enough context to make the point of each essay. This meant some historical context was glossed over for later essays, even when I think the reader would have benefited from having that information at an earlier time.
Though the organization of information was unconventional, I think the main issue I had with the book was their attempt to frame this as a call for moral righteousness for liberals. Near the end, they make a claim that “our overwhelming silence is a betrayal of the noble, definitive ideals that liberals and progressives profess to hold dear.” Personally, I think this is speaking too highly of liberals (who are supporting American colonialism & imperialism in many ways!!!). And by lumping together progressives and liberals in this way, it made their claim less clear.
The book also did not go so far as to claim that we should have an internationalist approach in general. I figured a book called Except for Palestine would spend more time proving that Palestine was the exception, especially since I think it is, unfortunately, one of many examples of how people exclude other countries’ struggles based on lack of information, or unquestioning trust in the narratives we’ve been told. -
Israel is an apartheid state.
There is much to be said about Israel and Palestine. It's not a battle that's been raging for hundreds of years but only since the 1940s. There are many interested parties, ideologies, religions and view points in looking at the conflict. If you are to truly step back and consider the problem from an objective stand point I think the conclusion is unassailable: Israel is an apartheid state. Palestinians live in an open air prison in Gaza and are victims of crimes against humanity. That's all there is to it. The Israeli government enjoys broad control over the Palestinians and does so with impunity because fo the direct support of the US government. The US and Israel share similar features in that they can act unilaterally, breaking international law, and pay exactly zero consequences.
This book covers a lot you need to know if you're not familiar: The Oslo Accord, The Antifadas, The BDS boycott movements, the propaganda of Israel to constantly victimize itself and we get commentary up to Trump stating Jerusalem as its capital.
Please read this and other books like it. Abject human rights violations are happening in Israel while the entire world looks away. History will not be kind to the current Israeli government. -
This was the December pick for the Rad Roopa Book Club, where we read books aligned with social justice and antiracist thought and praxis. Except for Palestine: The Limits of Progressive Politics is an overview of the history and politics of the twentieth century and first two decades of the twenty-first century as they pertain to attitudes towards Palestine.
As a child of the 1990s, as a non-Jewish person growing up in Canada, this has always been a part of modern history that I only vaguely understood. I knew the modern nation-state of Israel as we now know it was created by European powers in 1948, and I had a vague notion about what Palestine was, who Palestinians were, and how they contested Israel’s claim to and presence on that land. But for most of my childhood and adolescence, that vague notion was all I understood. As I lay awake in the middle of the night at 14 years old, I would listen to the BBC World Service talk about Bush bombing Iraq, and these kinds of snippets of news informed my view on the Middle East. Truly, it was “somewhere over there.”
Thankfully, I have since broadened my perspective. More newcomers coming to Canada from countries in that region—some by choice, others unfortunately refugees displaced by war or other disasters—has afforded me the opportunity to meet more people and hear their stories, learn about their culture. And I’ve learned more about Israel and Palestine, though I have a lot more learning left to do. Indeed, parts of this book left me slightly confused, for I think Hill and Plitnick assume slightly more familiarity with certain names and events from twentieth-century United States politics than I have!
But the one thing that I didn’t really get was why it has been (and remains, in many ways) so taboo to talk about Palestine, even among so-called liberal or progressive groups. This is what Hill and Plitnick are getting at in this book. They do a fair job of representing different perspectives, referencing both Palestinian and Israeli sources, discussing the role of the United States and other world powers, and generally trying to inform. That being said, this is not a book that tries to “both sides” the issue—it is clearly, firmly pro-Palestinian, and its attempts to present other perspectives are there only to help us understand how we got to here, not to equivocate. The conclusion makes this clear if it wasn’t already: the authors view what is happening in Palestine right now as a human rights crisis, and this book is one way they are trying to get more people to pay attention to it as such.
My thoughts, of course, turned to Canada’s own domestic crisis of colonialism and genocide with the Indigenous peoples from whom Europeans stole this land several centuries ago. The trend right now when talking reconciliation here is to locate that harm as history. In reality, you just have to look at the actions of current governments and institutions to see that colonialism is still happening here. This helps to explain partly why Canada and other states support Israel and, by and large, don’t want to acknowledge what is happening in Palestine or to Palestinians: we are doing it here too.
Except for Palestine highlights that, until now, few world leaders have been willing to appear “anti-Israel” because of how easily this is conflated with being antisemitic. They caution us not to view President Trump’s friendship and concessions towards Israel as an incredible outlier, showing that even past Democratic presidents were generally pro-Israel, albeit in a way that walked the line more finely. So much of politics in horse trading: you give me something, and I’ll give you this back, even if it’s not really something I want to do because at least I get something I want.
Although often verging on the academic and cerebral side, this book also makes itself accessible to us through oral history. Interviews or excerpts from news reports provide context for the Palestinian experience in Gaza, the West Bank, or abroad. This book is far from comprehensive and doesn’t go too deep; however, you’ll come away with at least a general understanding of the conditions Palestinians experience today, the human rights violations, and the violence.
I would have liked the authors to cover more about how Palestine is erased from leftist discourse in general. The book mostly focuses on formal, political speech. How is Palestine ignored or erased in our pop culture? In our memes? Online? How does this connect to intersectional marginalizations—queer Palestinian experiences, disabled Palestinian experiences, etc. That’s probably a wider scope than this book could cover, but these are the questions that are coming to mind now that I’ve read it.
I would recommend this for people with an interest in politics and history. As I said at the start of this review, the book assumes a certain amount of prior knowledge that maybe I fell short of; nevertheless, I muddled through (thanks, Google!). Clearly I have more learning to do on this subject. Still, Except for Palestine is informative and deep, helping me fill in gaps in my knowledge and helping me ask that all-important question: why? The world isn’t the way it is just because; there are so many whys, and now I know some more of them.
Originally posted on
Kara.Reviews, where you can easily browse all my reviews and subscribe to my newsletter.
-
أنصح بقراءة هذا الكتاب لمن يود التعرف على ازدواجية المعايير في السياسة الأمريكية تجاه القضية الفلسطينية. مختصر الكتاب، أن كلا الحزبين الديموقراطي والجمهوري الأمريكيين ينادي بسياسات (متقدمة) تنادي بالحقوق المدنية مثل المساواة بين الجنسين، نبذ العنصرية العرقية، تكافؤ الفرص، حرية التعبير، حقوق الأقليات والشذوذ وغيرها. إلا أن معظم الأصوات تسكت عند الحديث عن سياسات الاستيطان والحصار والتمييز في الأراضي المحتلة. يحلل الكتاب تاريخ هذا الصراع منذ نشأة الحركة الصهيونية أيام تيودور هرتزل، الحرب العالمية الثانية، المحرقة النازية، وعد بيلفور، النكبة، وما تلتها من حروب أيام جمال عبد الناصر، والسادات، ثم اتفاقيات السلام مع مصر وعدد من الدول الاخرى، اتفاقية اوسلو وغيرها. مع التركيز على دور السياسة الأمريكية في هذه الأحداث.
-
A great primer that gives context into the Palestinian struggle, particularly the role of US imperialism. Provides great discussion about the complicity of Liberal America in one of the greatest human rights violations in the world. Touches on the Right to Exist argument, the criminalization of BDS, Trump and pre-45 policies, and Gaza specifically.
-
***I won this book in a Goodreads Giveaway***
Marc Lamont Hill has a valuable and timely thesis here. Progressives, as a group, prioritize human rights around the world as fundamental but have been notably quiet when it comes to the human rights of Palestinians. This needs to be understood so we can do better for ALL people.
Unfortunately, I don't think this thesis can be properly fleshed out in a book that's only 158 pages. Either Mr. Hill wrote under the assumption that his audience knows the history of the region reasonably well or he doesn't find that particularly relevant. I disagree with both of these. To make the case that we aren't doing enough to support the human rights of Palestinian people is easy. To know what to do to generate the most good is much harder and requires a deep understanding of a really complex situation. I think this book fell far short of that. -
Reads like a very thorough, well sourced (nearly half of the kindle format was notes and sources), and, at times, passionate position paper. Its primary aim, besides just to give an overview of the current political situation (from which I learned a lot, even as someone relatively familiar with the issue), is to convince liberal democrats to put pressure on the democratic establishment to shift their position on Palestinian rights. It's pretty absurd to me that the fate of so many people on the other side of the planet have their basic rights and livelihoods dependent on an American political party shifting their support and then having enough power for that shift to matter.
But I think, after reading (although this isn't the authors' argument) that we really have to view Israel as the 51st state, with how much money we are giving them. Just like most any conservative state in the US, they are overall a tax drain on the system, have to be constantly watched for legalizing discrimination, at the same time as we have to resist the urge to dehumanize its residents (although, like the other similarities, this one is more extreme, as carefully watching for anti-semitism is both a central theme of this book and a prerequisite for doing work in this sphere). And like most conservative states, the key is empowering the entire citizenry to participate in the democratic process, free from intimidation. In Israel, that is just so much further away from a reality than anywhere else.
So yeah, great book, a great place to start. I think, although efforts were made to include an Israeli perspective at many points, you might need to read something on the other side for a little more balance, but there is never really going to be a balanced perspective on this issue, and I think listening primarily to the side that is suffering the greatest, which is clearly Palestine, should be the default. -
“If we claim to care about producing freedom and justice around the world, which is often the expressed basis for American foreign policy, then we must remain morally consistent. Palestine cannot be an exception.”
The writers call out the hypocrisy of progressive politicians who deliberately turn a blind eye towards the ongoing I*raeli crimes and apartheid against Palestinians.
An example of the contradictory stances of American progressives:
“American progressives expressed sympathy for those fleeing persecution, who were desperately pursuing a better life for themselves and their families. Their response to Trump’s draconian immigration views, as well as the policy proposals reflected and foreshadowed by those views, stood in stark contrast to another major announcement that the White House made just weeks earlier.
In the summer of that same year, the Trump administration decided to cut off funding for the United Nations Relief and Works Agency (UNRWA), the agency that provides emergency food, shelter, medication, supplies, and education to millions of Palestinian refugees living in the West Bank, Gaza, and camps in neighboring countries. As a result of this decision, fewer people would have access to proper schooling, health care, and basic life-saving services. This time, rather than outrage, progressives offered little more than silence or apparent indifference.”
It's good short book that lays basic information about what’s currently happening. It also provides a brief overview of the history of Palestinian struggle, BDS movement, Gaza. -
Information density made this a challenging read, but it’s a really good overview of the Israel-Palestine conflict, something I knew hardly anything about before digging into it. Absolutely a recommended read for anyone interested in learning more about the conflict and particularly about the numerous human rights violations committed by Israel, and America’s (liberals and conservatives) part in aiding and abetting these behaviors.
-
Having followed this issue intensively for most of my life, which is approaching its 70th year, this kind of commentary is more of a sideshow. Moreover, it endorses and encourages what Nasim Taleb called "thought clustering," where tribal alliances count for more taking the measure of a policy, i.e., you're "pro-gun," but also "pro-life," Conservative, Christian, "Constitutionalist," etc. and you simply fall into that template without having to think about the implications of what you support. One buys into the culture, not the policy.
There must be a peaceful solution that gives the Palestinians an autonomous, sovereign state, and an end to occupation. There are times when the two sides were tantalizingly close. (The blame for diplomatic failure depends on who you support.)
Time has also passed. The idea of a "right of return" must be jettisoned. At this point, even contemplating it is bizarre. For one, there is no way the Israelis will accept it, and the Palestinian side has nothing to offer in exchange for such a thing. And how would it even be accomplished after 70 years of population growth? But this is 2021. There are no "refugees," because they're all dead. People are where they are, and the Palestinians need to imagine a national future where they run their own affairs for the benefit of their own people. It doesn't matter where they do it anymore. I can't even move back to my old neighborhood, and I left willingly.
And the sad thing is, no matter what terms could be achieved now, they will be inferior to what could have been before.
The answer to the conflict lies in resolving it, not critiquing the political or social aspects of it. The people who live with this thing are playing on the field. The rest of us are in the cheap seats. -
More of a 3.5 for me. Well written and informative, though I would imagine most readers who pick up the book probably already agree with their general thesis. My main criticism is that it isn’t entirely clear to me who the intended audience is or whether the authors contributed anything new to the topic.
-
“As the violence raged in Gaza, Democrats were as silent as their Republicans colleagues. One need not to support Hamas to recognise that people of Gaza are living in an unacceptable squalor.
Yet, as we have demonstrated, the United Stated has not merely been indifferent to the crisis in Gaza, but played an active, significant and thoroughly bipartisan role in degrading the conditions.” Ch. 4 The Crisis in Gaza
This book is SO WELL RESEARCHED AND WELL WRITTEN! It challenges both regular citizens and American politicians alike about turning the blind eye to what happens in Palestine, and calls out the hypocrisy and contradictions between one's claimed beliefs and actions.
I was very hesitant prior to reading a book about Palestine by nonArabs, specially Americans. I was worried they'll just add to the fake narratives and manipulating the truths, remain *ignorantly* neutral/indifferent, or the lack of research would clearly show. However, the authors just proved me wrong and did a great job in challenging one's thoughts while displaying well researched arguments and facts. All respect to
Marc Lamont Hill and
Mitchell Plitnick for all of their dedication and not falling into the fake narratives.
In addition to challenging one's thoughts and beliefs, the book serves as a wake-up call and a call to action to private citizens, public officials, and politicians.
I would 10000% recommend this book to anyone that wants to be called out and challenged, learn more about the Palestinian struggles, grow and take action!
“Today, this is what is still being demanded when defenders of Israel’s actions and policies call for affirmation of its right to exist. The issue is not Jews rights to constitute a nation or even pursue a homeland.
Rather, the issue was whether their national identity and historical and cultural connection to the land that has been called Israel, Palestine, Canaan, Judea, etc. justify the dispossessions of the Palestinians. Demanding that not only supporters of Palestinians rights, but also Palestinians themselves affirm this point is not reasonable.” Ch. 1 The Right to Exist -
Argues that American leftists need to do a better job supporting Palestinians. I hugely agree — can we please place some real humanitarian demands on our aid to Israel? — but that’s mostly besides the point here.
File this as another book that agitates for change by presenting a filtered and one-sided view of reality, which of course only causes the gap between each side to grow. The book skips over most history and selectively presents the bits that it does include. There are a ton of relevant facts and arguments that the authors conveniently leave out. Plus, it seems strange to discuss this topic without addressing (i) the campaign finance considerations behind how US politicians vote (see “The Israel Lobby” for an interesting book here) and (ii) the nuclear considerations and other strategic tensions that largely dictate US policy in the region.
Would recommend that most casual readers pass on this book and instead read genuine history on the subject so they can better educate themselves and their communities. I recommend Mark Tessler’s tome, which is huge but very impartial, or perhaps Avi Schlaim’s The Iron Wall (largely Israeli POV) paired with Rashid Khalidi’s The Hundred Year’s War (entirely Palestinian POV). -
This book was overall good, addressed some of my knowledge holes in Israeli/Palestinian conflict. E.g. I have vague recollection of when Hamas won election, and taking over Gaza completely, and these issues have been explained thoroughly in the book.
However, the book is a bit dense for such short length, and somewhat repetitive. I think the book would be more informative and readable if it was organized chronologically rather than theme based. Especially earlier history around the Six day war is still very unclear to me, in regard to how Israel came about, and where Palestinians entered the equation, etc. -
This is so informative and well articulated about the American policy as a medium between Palestine and Israel, and how it’s always backs Israel up, and violates many international laws for it. I listened to the audiobook and I have to get a physical copy of this.
-
Great book outlining the current challenging issues facing the Israel Palestine apartheid. Wish it had a section with intro info about how Israel was formed. Would definitely recommend to anyone who feels awkward talking about this issue or wants to know more
-
While a deep read, was definitely a summative and quick exploration of the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, and America's history in dealing with and deepening the conflict.
-
This is a really great account of the ways progressives and Democrats have failed to uphold their supposed values when it comes to supporting the rights of Palestinians to self-determination. This book does require a basic understanding—at minimum—of the Israeli apartheid system in Occupied Palestine to get the most out of it.
-
Really interesting book. I would recommend to anyone. Very quick read.
-
The book argues, compellingly, that Trump was no exception. He merely took a little further policies that had already been enabled by prior US presidents.
It does however offer hope for a more peaceful, happier outcome. Provided that there is a shift in progressive politics. -
This is one of the best resources I have found for introducing western (particularly American) audiences to Zionism, the illegal occupation of Palestine, the Nakba, and the ongoing regional atrocities supported by American and its allies. Hill and Plitnick are remarkably thorough in their research (the "works cited" section is over 50 pages long), which not only lends credence to their claims, but also gives a wealth of additional articles, books, documentaries, etc. for readers to study and cite on their own.
I highly recommend this book for anyone seeking to learn more about one of the greatest human rights crises of our time. -
finally finished this book. was pretty good - though i would’ve liked the authors to focus more on how the democratic party is not super supportive of the palestinian cause. the authors write well, yet they assume a lot of prior knowledge from the reader . not my vibe .
closing thoughts - when a state creates and publicly funds segregated highways (one side for israeli license plates, the other for palestinian license plates) can it really be called a democracy ?
