Peter, I have no doubt that you were sincerely trying to do the right thing, both in accepting the invitation and in later issuing your apology. But I feel strongly that BDS is so enamored with their tactics that they fail to consider the goal. How will we end injustice if we are not allowed to speak to those in a position to help us end it? Rather than pressuring you to apologize I wish some of your friends had instead realized that by speaking the truth in these spaces you have the power to change hearts and minds.
I could not have said it better, @Jessica Brown. The BDS criticism of the movie "No Other Land" because of the collaboration between West Bank Palestinians with Israeli Jews was quite telling. The future will be a shared one. It may take a long time, and more horror is occurring as I write, yet I personally know many Israelis here in the U.S. who oppose the path taken by generations of Israeli governments; we should not turn our back on the students and faculty in Tel Aviv who need to hear what you have to say. Your words matter, and who hears them also matters.
This was a great conversation. I strongly support BDS and agree that it was inappropriate for Peter to go to Tel Aviv University, but I think Peter’s mistake has created a learning opportunity for all of us. I certainly learned from this conversation.
This is how to do an apology. In the midst of unqualified self-criticism, Peter Beinart does not turn his brain off but reflects on his action in a way that is useful for all of us. Professor Beinart's words here make me realize that an apology is a thing in itself, with its own ethical status--not just an action under duress. "What counts in an apology is what you do next." Kudos also to Ahmed Moor for the thoughtfulness of his role here.
I feel strengthened and better prepared for my own next apology.
I don’t agree that Peter shouldn’t have spoken at Tel Aviv University. We have to engage and debate those we disagree with. I agree with Jeremy Ben-Ami on this issue. If we are not willing to debate and have civil discussion with Zionists we will never be able to advance our cause. I’m sorry Peter was pressured to apologize for this. I consider it part of cancel culture and it does nothing to advance the struggle for Palestinian self-determination. This cannot be achieved if we don’t reach and convince Israeli Jews.
It is always fair game to criticize someone for their words. It is never, ever, ever fair to criticize someone purely for the person or group they have chosen to speak to. This is at the heart of both woke and fascist suppression of speech.
Sorry, but the moment you use the word "woke" as a pejorative, you lose credibility with me. The cultural appropriation of a benign and basically positive term in the black lexicon is racist at its core. What if right wing Christian nationalists launched an "anti-tikkun olam" campaign, belittling a liberal/progressive Jewish term ?
I never heard a white person use the term "woke" prior to the right wing taking it up as a cause celebre.
I don't think this is an issue that's left or right. I think its tribal. I worked in the mainstream Jewish community many years ago, and we were told we were not allowed to use the word "Palestinian" in any official communication -- the only acceptable term was "Arab". To this day, most Jewish organizations strongly condemn Jews who meet and speak before pro-Palestinian groups. My own synagogue has not permitted any outreach to Palestinian organizations in the community.
Intolerance has reigned in "moderate" Jewish circles for decades. Just look at how a mildly liberal pro-Israel group like J Street has been dragged through the mud and rebuked by the Jewish establishment. I would put AIPAC in the fascist category, but when to comes intolerance and punishment of free speech, AIPAC sits up pretty high on the list.
Thank you, Peter, for your vulnerability in facing up to your mistake so publicly and openly and in dialogue with someone who would fully hold you accountable with love and respect. It's a great model for all of us.
Should boycotts encompass universities? Should professors in the US and other parts of the world stop engaging academic institutions in Israel and their faculty? The "mistake" here--"missed opportunity" would be the term I'd choose--is to have gone to TAU thinking there was something an American could *tell* Israelis. What are the conversations among Israeli academics? Are faculty feeling as silenced in Israel as they are in the US? How has the past two years shifted conversations in and out of the classroom for historians and other researchers?
-
I do recognize a strong argument for "crossing the picket line," as Ahmed Moor said, but I cannot think of a single case when boycotting knowledge producers generated positive change.
Your lesson: “to listen.” Is so important. I support BDS but not cancel culture. I hope the intensity of the attacks against you shrink. And that your anguish lessens. Your error in judgment makes it possible for others to understand why BDS matters. Looking forward to your future work having appreciated deeply your commitment to justice. Thank you for sharing your insights and those of your enlightening guests.
People who disagree with Peter's apology fail to address the main issue of the Tel Aviv University venue. As was pointed out in the podcast TAU is not simply an academic institution where freedom of speech is the only value in question. TAU is deeply entwined in Israel's military and government when it comes to long term occupation and the Gaza war. Peter's choice of TAU lend it a certain veneer of ethical virtue which TAU does not deserve. Just today, TAU imposed even greater restrictions on student rights to demonstrate on campus.
Peter could have made his speech at a more neutral venue; or an Israeli anti-war leader could have spoken at TAU without reproach. It's pretty clear to me that the Israeli's have their own mees that needs cleaning up, and that Peter's presence is not going to provide the leadership necessary to move the needle in the right direction.
I don't have exceptionally strong feelings about this issue. But it's clear to me that those who condemn Peter for apologizing are doing so based on an agenda that has nothing to do with the crimes against humanity Israel continues to commit against Palestinians in Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
I believe Peter explains his reason for apologizing. It is because his decision to go was not Palestinian centered, that is with the oppressed and not the oppressor. And he admits to not listening to voices that asked him not to go.
I hear the struggle here and respect so much this dialogue there is a place for diplomatic gestures of trial of influence. If we don’t take such chances how to we get negotiations? I too have withdrawn from family members that threaten my existence, but some time may try to again find a common canyon . Who knows? Both of you make sense in the contradictions. Thank you for doing this to understand our conflicts.
the decision to speak at tau was correct. the predominantly lefty audience would be open to your ideas. the decision to declare the talk a mistake was a spineless surrender to your BDS masters. you lost any credibility you may have had.
Funny, that you would choose an objective term such as "correct", when you are really only stating your personal opinion. This is an issue of moral and ethical values, not a pop quiz.
As for "BDS masters", in this country (U.S.) we are ruled by anti-BDS masters. Perhaps you are aware, but the ultra-right wing ALEC think tank developed and promoted the anti-BDS legislation that has been passed in this country -- making it illegal in many to engage in pro-BDS activity. I find it shameful that so many "progressive" Jews in America have sold out their own strongly held religious principles in order to uphold their tribal interests.
Your own ad hominem attack on Peter raises a red flag about your own principles and enslavement to blind loyalty to Israel's distorted Zionism
You did the right thing by going there and you shouldn’t have apologized. Why can’t we be comfortable with idea that it’s ok for some of us to violate BDS in certain situations? Especially when the potential upside or benefit of this violation far outweighs the downside? You didn’t do it for your personal benefit (eg buying a listed consumer product). Some of us have the background, the access and the ability to be more helpful than harmful by reaching out and speaking to certain Israeli / Zionist elements. Maybe some members of the audience had been all in on the genocide, but are now seeing the mass migration, economic degradation, extremism, global ostracism etc… and are open to new narratives. Maybe these elements are influential within their communities. BDS should not be absolute and inflexible. We harm the movement if we approach it this way
thank you, peter, for this courageous conversation, and the humility and integrity you are modeling for us. i also appreciated ahmed's relational way of confrontation.
Did any subscribers hear about this TAU event before it happened?
Or even know he was going to Israel?
Peter usually posts on this website about his upcoming public appearances. The last update I see here was posted on November 10, when he mentioned speaking engagements in Ithaca, NY, on November 10, and in NYC on December 8. Nothing in between.
Peter's X feed does have a tweet that was posted on the day of the TAU event on November 25: "Tonight, I’m going to speak at Tel Aviv University. ..."
Normally, an event like this would be announced to the university community at least a few days in advance. Was there some secrecy here so that did not happen? Or was it just that nobody in the wider world outside TAU happened to find out about it? It would appear that people like Ali Abunimah and Noura Erakat didn't know about it until Peter's tweet of the same day.
I don't have anything interesting to say about whether Peter should have spoken at TAU, or whether he should have apologized for having done so. I just find it very curious how he didn't announce this appearance in the same way he does his other ones. My guess is that after making his decision to speak at TAU, he didn't want to hear from other people asking him to change his mind.
Peter, I have no doubt that you were sincerely trying to do the right thing, both in accepting the invitation and in later issuing your apology. But I feel strongly that BDS is so enamored with their tactics that they fail to consider the goal. How will we end injustice if we are not allowed to speak to those in a position to help us end it? Rather than pressuring you to apologize I wish some of your friends had instead realized that by speaking the truth in these spaces you have the power to change hearts and minds.
I could not have said it better, @Jessica Brown. The BDS criticism of the movie "No Other Land" because of the collaboration between West Bank Palestinians with Israeli Jews was quite telling. The future will be a shared one. It may take a long time, and more horror is occurring as I write, yet I personally know many Israelis here in the U.S. who oppose the path taken by generations of Israeli governments; we should not turn our back on the students and faculty in Tel Aviv who need to hear what you have to say. Your words matter, and who hears them also matters.
This was a great conversation. I strongly support BDS and agree that it was inappropriate for Peter to go to Tel Aviv University, but I think Peter’s mistake has created a learning opportunity for all of us. I certainly learned from this conversation.
This is how to do an apology. In the midst of unqualified self-criticism, Peter Beinart does not turn his brain off but reflects on his action in a way that is useful for all of us. Professor Beinart's words here make me realize that an apology is a thing in itself, with its own ethical status--not just an action under duress. "What counts in an apology is what you do next." Kudos also to Ahmed Moor for the thoughtfulness of his role here.
I feel strengthened and better prepared for my own next apology.
I don’t agree that Peter shouldn’t have spoken at Tel Aviv University. We have to engage and debate those we disagree with. I agree with Jeremy Ben-Ami on this issue. If we are not willing to debate and have civil discussion with Zionists we will never be able to advance our cause. I’m sorry Peter was pressured to apologize for this. I consider it part of cancel culture and it does nothing to advance the struggle for Palestinian self-determination. This cannot be achieved if we don’t reach and convince Israeli Jews.
It is always fair game to criticize someone for their words. It is never, ever, ever fair to criticize someone purely for the person or group they have chosen to speak to. This is at the heart of both woke and fascist suppression of speech.
Sorry, but the moment you use the word "woke" as a pejorative, you lose credibility with me. The cultural appropriation of a benign and basically positive term in the black lexicon is racist at its core. What if right wing Christian nationalists launched an "anti-tikkun olam" campaign, belittling a liberal/progressive Jewish term ?
I never heard a white person use the term "woke" prior to the right wing taking it up as a cause celebre.
Point taken. So let me say intolerant progressive instead.
Thank you.
I don't think this is an issue that's left or right. I think its tribal. I worked in the mainstream Jewish community many years ago, and we were told we were not allowed to use the word "Palestinian" in any official communication -- the only acceptable term was "Arab". To this day, most Jewish organizations strongly condemn Jews who meet and speak before pro-Palestinian groups. My own synagogue has not permitted any outreach to Palestinian organizations in the community.
Intolerance has reigned in "moderate" Jewish circles for decades. Just look at how a mildly liberal pro-Israel group like J Street has been dragged through the mud and rebuked by the Jewish establishment. I would put AIPAC in the fascist category, but when to comes intolerance and punishment of free speech, AIPAC sits up pretty high on the list.
Agree completely.
"It is never, ever, ever fair to criticize someone purely for the person or group they have chosen to speak to."
But that was the rationale that Jewish Voice for Peace gave in 2015 when it announced its decision not to work with Alison Weir of If Americans Knew:
https://www.jewishvoiceforpeace.org/2015/06/15/jewish-voice-for-peace-statement-on-our-relationship-with-alison-weir/
Thank you, Peter, for your vulnerability in facing up to your mistake so publicly and openly and in dialogue with someone who would fully hold you accountable with love and respect. It's a great model for all of us.
❤️
♥️
Should boycotts encompass universities? Should professors in the US and other parts of the world stop engaging academic institutions in Israel and their faculty? The "mistake" here--"missed opportunity" would be the term I'd choose--is to have gone to TAU thinking there was something an American could *tell* Israelis. What are the conversations among Israeli academics? Are faculty feeling as silenced in Israel as they are in the US? How has the past two years shifted conversations in and out of the classroom for historians and other researchers?
-
I do recognize a strong argument for "crossing the picket line," as Ahmed Moor said, but I cannot think of a single case when boycotting knowledge producers generated positive change.
Your lesson: “to listen.” Is so important. I support BDS but not cancel culture. I hope the intensity of the attacks against you shrink. And that your anguish lessens. Your error in judgment makes it possible for others to understand why BDS matters. Looking forward to your future work having appreciated deeply your commitment to justice. Thank you for sharing your insights and those of your enlightening guests.
I agree with your take on this.
People who disagree with Peter's apology fail to address the main issue of the Tel Aviv University venue. As was pointed out in the podcast TAU is not simply an academic institution where freedom of speech is the only value in question. TAU is deeply entwined in Israel's military and government when it comes to long term occupation and the Gaza war. Peter's choice of TAU lend it a certain veneer of ethical virtue which TAU does not deserve. Just today, TAU imposed even greater restrictions on student rights to demonstrate on campus.
Peter could have made his speech at a more neutral venue; or an Israeli anti-war leader could have spoken at TAU without reproach. It's pretty clear to me that the Israeli's have their own mees that needs cleaning up, and that Peter's presence is not going to provide the leadership necessary to move the needle in the right direction.
I don't have exceptionally strong feelings about this issue. But it's clear to me that those who condemn Peter for apologizing are doing so based on an agenda that has nothing to do with the crimes against humanity Israel continues to commit against Palestinians in Gaza, the West Bank and East Jerusalem.
If we’re not allowed to make mistakes, then we’re no longer part of the human race.
The road to wisdom? -- Well, it's plain
and simple to express:
Err
and err
and err again
but less
and less
and less.
Piet Hein
Peter,
Could you explain your reasons for apologizing? There is some context missing from the conversation.
Update: I see your tweet here: https://x.com/PeterBeinart/status/1993776435673419788.
I'm still wondering about it. It's hard for me to see how your visit lent support to Tel Aviv University.
I believe Peter explains his reason for apologizing. It is because his decision to go was not Palestinian centered, that is with the oppressed and not the oppressor. And he admits to not listening to voices that asked him not to go.
I hear the struggle here and respect so much this dialogue there is a place for diplomatic gestures of trial of influence. If we don’t take such chances how to we get negotiations? I too have withdrawn from family members that threaten my existence, but some time may try to again find a common canyon . Who knows? Both of you make sense in the contradictions. Thank you for doing this to understand our conflicts.
the decision to speak at tau was correct. the predominantly lefty audience would be open to your ideas. the decision to declare the talk a mistake was a spineless surrender to your BDS masters. you lost any credibility you may have had.
"spineless surrender to your BDS masters"
Who knew that the BDS movement had that kind of power over anyone?
Funny, that you would choose an objective term such as "correct", when you are really only stating your personal opinion. This is an issue of moral and ethical values, not a pop quiz.
As for "BDS masters", in this country (U.S.) we are ruled by anti-BDS masters. Perhaps you are aware, but the ultra-right wing ALEC think tank developed and promoted the anti-BDS legislation that has been passed in this country -- making it illegal in many to engage in pro-BDS activity. I find it shameful that so many "progressive" Jews in America have sold out their own strongly held religious principles in order to uphold their tribal interests.
Your own ad hominem attack on Peter raises a red flag about your own principles and enslavement to blind loyalty to Israel's distorted Zionism
You did the right thing by going there and you shouldn’t have apologized. Why can’t we be comfortable with idea that it’s ok for some of us to violate BDS in certain situations? Especially when the potential upside or benefit of this violation far outweighs the downside? You didn’t do it for your personal benefit (eg buying a listed consumer product). Some of us have the background, the access and the ability to be more helpful than harmful by reaching out and speaking to certain Israeli / Zionist elements. Maybe some members of the audience had been all in on the genocide, but are now seeing the mass migration, economic degradation, extremism, global ostracism etc… and are open to new narratives. Maybe these elements are influential within their communities. BDS should not be absolute and inflexible. We harm the movement if we approach it this way
thank you, peter, for this courageous conversation, and the humility and integrity you are modeling for us. i also appreciated ahmed's relational way of confrontation.
Did any subscribers hear about this TAU event before it happened?
Or even know he was going to Israel?
Peter usually posts on this website about his upcoming public appearances. The last update I see here was posted on November 10, when he mentioned speaking engagements in Ithaca, NY, on November 10, and in NYC on December 8. Nothing in between.
Peter's X feed does have a tweet that was posted on the day of the TAU event on November 25: "Tonight, I’m going to speak at Tel Aviv University. ..."
Normally, an event like this would be announced to the university community at least a few days in advance. Was there some secrecy here so that did not happen? Or was it just that nobody in the wider world outside TAU happened to find out about it? It would appear that people like Ali Abunimah and Noura Erakat didn't know about it until Peter's tweet of the same day.
I don't have anything interesting to say about whether Peter should have spoken at TAU, or whether he should have apologized for having done so. I just find it very curious how he didn't announce this appearance in the same way he does his other ones. My guess is that after making his decision to speak at TAU, he didn't want to hear from other people asking him to change his mind.