Yes, I urge students to avoid conversation — but not all conversation, just that which is designed to legitimize horrible viewpoints. As the U.S. empire de-masks itself and slides further into authoritarianism, we should not give credibility to ideologies which are morally bankrupt: fascism, Nazism, Zionism, white supremacy. I believe Hindutva should be here too.
Palestine teaches. Palestine teaches many lessons, but it is especially powerful in deconstructing propaganda. Over the past year, the university has run several “conversation” events on Palestine/Israel, pretending to “build bridges” and whatnot. Ranging from “Deeper Conversations” to “Sharaka,” university-sponsored conversation events have a distinct pattern and flavor. As repression of pro-Palestine action spills over into broader repression of progressivism, Palestine shows us what to expect all around. As part of our efforts, we should not fall for shallow gestures at “dialogue.”
On Thursday, Feb. 27, the perfect example came to campus. The university hosted a pro-Israel organization, Sharaka, to host a conversation about “peace between Israel and its Arab neighbors.” Despite it being billed as a conversation event, Chaco Iwase, Elliot Liermann, and I protested outside, and a fellow student asked why. This article is the full “why.”
Sharaka claims to promote peace, but their declared goals suggest otherwise. Sharaka seeks to advance the Abraham Accords, a Trump-era deal from 2020 that intentionally excludes Palestinians while “solving” the Arab-Israeli conflict. This may seem ironic, but Sharaka is designed this way. Steel City Anti-Fascist League investigated their board members and found a string of racist rhetoric. Sharaka speakers have even insulted their own program participants (with Islamophobic remarks) according to Israeli news outlets.
Intriguingly, a racist organization like Sharaka can co-exist with a commitment to dialogue and understanding. But Sharaka is not merely a worst example: Sharaka is a window into how conversation events function. From “Building Bridges” at Pitt to the “Deeper Conversations” series here at Carnegie Mellon, conversation events in Pittsburgh follow a pattern. They’re consistently framed as two-sided dialogue: Arab and Jew, coming together, forging understanding and empathy. These events promote the same basic perspective: a two-sided conflict, sides that hate each other, that just need to sit down and start chatting. Boycotts and pressure go unmentioned, and the ugly reality of apartheid is tucked away under vague notions of coexistence.
An organization running an event controls the dialogue: it chooses speakers and moderates discussion. The people on stage thus represent the organization’s viewpoints, or at least the viewpoints it deems appropriate. For example, you will likely never hear a Palestinian speaker who supports their people’s basic right to resist genocide and colonialism. Instead, Palestinian and Arab speakers are expected to denounce Hamas and often do so automatically, as Rula Hardal did in “A Land for All.” Discourse expectations do not only exclude viewpoints, they also shape perspectives — by expecting Palestinians to condemn themselves, these events shift blame away from Israel’s crimes, assuaging the Zionist oppressor’s ailing conscience.
Indeed, a “conscience massage” would probably be a better label for these conversation events. They do not constitute genuine conversation: the expectations imposed on speakers push them toward pro-Israelism or shallow neutrality. Yet they make the audience feel better by offering a Palestinian or Arab speaker. The presence of the token Arab reassures the Zionist audience that they’re not racist and they support peace. Like a revamped version of “my Black friend.”
What can we learn from all this? Well, don’t fall for cheap tricks. Israel is a colonial entity, and no amount of conversation can compensate for the violence it generates. For two, don’t engage in shallow conversation with ideologies of supremacy. If you normalize genocide, you can normalize anything.
Leave a Reply