I first read about this imbroglio yesterday. I think Guernica magazine editors made a mistake in publishing this apologia, but compounded that error in removing the essay from the magazine's website. The fact is, the essay now exists, and Guernica published it. The record is the record. I get people at Guernica resigning if they wish, but their acts struck me as primarily performative. I am glad the LA Times provided the link to the essay (see here) from the Wayback Machine so I could judge for myself whether the author's essay was, in fact, an apologia.
I read the essay, and, as well written as it is, I have to admit it is an obvious apologia. The language is passive nearly each time it discusses Israeli conduct which leads or led to Palestinian suffering and death, while Hamas is presented as a larger-than-life monstrous organization whose violent acts are somehow functionally different from Israeli bombs and continued Israeli dehumanization. The essay writer wrote in a manner which made it sound as if all was essentially "normal" in Gaza and the West Bank before October 7, 2023, when 2023 had already been shaping up as the sixth or seventh most violent year since 2006 in terms of Israeli murders of Palestinians. See Wiki (Timeline of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict in 2023) for starters on this topic and see how much US media, whether legacy or alternative, did not really cover. It is ridiculous to state there was any functioning ceasefire as far as Israel was concerned during much of 2023.
Yes, the essay writer does nice things for Palestinian people over the years. However, the way she described how she and a Palestinian family with an injured son were speaking with each other in broken English, Arabic, and Hebrew, reminded me of a southern white belle in Antebellum USA doing an act of kindness toward an injured enslaved person. The essay writer conveyed no sense she truly sees the fundamental problem with a system that creates the situation where she does her charity work, or how charity work can sometimes (maybe more often) morph into an acceptance of larger political and social injustices. Her own reaction to Hamas' atrocities on October 7 carry with that reaction a fundamentally naive view of what was happening before October 7. For someone so clearly learned and elegant in her writing and translation work, she showed no understanding of how British or US colonial structures operated with respect to indigenous peoples, or how one should never be surprised that colonized people will sometimes react with horrific violence against civilians in colonialist governments and systems. For we Americans, we should think back to mid 19th Century Comanche raids of white settlers, where Comanche warriors viciously killed men, women, and children--and raped women before killing them. And then we should remember how the US cavalry reacted--and remember, too, the outcome of our nation's genocide of Native Americans (just under four million indigenous people residing in 1776 in the land of the current continental US compared to merely 250,000 in the US census of 1900. See Wiki for the grim numbers).
For me, the imbroglio, as I am calling it, among this small literary left set is classic because, other than this, who besides people such as myself even knows Guernica magazine? We who inhabit marginalized left circles may fret and start to sound like Bill Maher over Guernica editors' censorship. But, let's consider a reverse scenario with a corporate media legacy publication. Imagine a corporate media legacy outlet published a Palestinian writer who wrote in the same passive voice about Hamas' atrocities on and before October 7th (yes, before October 7th, Hamas committed various acts of terrorism, remember, my fellow lefties? :)). And then the Palestinian writer wrote with a certain naive sensibility where she could do no more than send a reply text to a distraught Israeli Jewish friend, saying in effect, "oh too bad" about the latest Hamas atrocity. And then the writer, in the same essay, wrote in a manner revealing her not correcting a Palestinian friend who said there were "good rockets" being launched against Israeli civilians (the phrase in the essay writer's article was there were "good bombs" being dropped on Palestinians in Gaza). If such an article was published, the general public in the US would be outraged against that media outlet. "How DARE ____________ (media outlet) publish such hateful pro-terrorist propaganda!?!" And there would be so many mainstream voices demanding the article be retracted, just as Guernica editors did. And we lefties would be plaintively crying "Censorship!" Ah, the cynical ironies of politics.
As it is, we already see how it is fine to hear and see those who yelled most loudly against "cancel culture" suddenly demand firing or canceling people who voice sympathy for Palestinians. I don't think I have to link to examples, do I? :)
I guess I've just lived too long, for I am cynically amused how Guernica's editors compounded their initial publishing error by removing the essay from the magazine's website. Thank goodness for the Wayback Machine. What is sad, however, is how these marginalized lefties have revealed how marginalized they are, and that the only publicity they receive is when they personally turn on each other. It's not as ridiculous as the wonderful scene in Life of Brian about the Judean People's Front leader saying how he hates the People's Front of Judea more than the Romans. But, I am thinking about that scene in a way I admit I don't like because I do think Guernica's editors should have seen what I saw as obviously wrong with the essay's tone and perspective. They could have had a kind and compassionate discussion with this intelligent and well meaning writer about her essay--and why she may wish to re-write the essay, and speak again with Palestinian acquaintances and friends, to create an essay with a more balanced and humane lens consistent with leftist antiwar and anti-occupation sensibilities.
With regard to the essay writer's passive voice, I know I have been very conscious about that passive voice in media coverage when describing Israel's conduct. I continue to see it all over legacy media coverage, and even before October 7, 2023. I was, however, frankly surprised that someone so sympathetic to Palestinian suffering was unable to recognize the meaning of the structural issues of Israeli occupation, and then had the audacity to cut off Palestinian acquaintances and friends with whom she previously worked in her charitable efforts because of this modern version of a horrific Comanche raid. I expect people who identify with left politics to be able to hold two paradoxical thoughts in their heads if they keep in mind the need for human connection, love in a justice-sense, and recognition that unjust systems need to be changed. I guess I am still naive that way.
