When our governments insist with all their propaganda tools that speaking out against Israel is antisemitic - conflating antizionism with antisemitism - we can’t be surprised that some angry teens in Amsterdam - furious about an ongoing genocide - make the same (stupid and dangerous) mistake. Fighting the latter, implies fighting the former.

This blog post first appeared in February 2024 on the website of OpenTech(AUC). Whatsapp is a bad deal Normally, when you feel you’re getting the short end of a stick, for example when the supermarket sells you expensive mushy cauliflowers, or when the organization you volunteer at treats you disrespectfully, you go and find what you need somewhere else. This ability to “defect” to an alternative when you feel you’re not getting a good deal, is an important “power” that helps you get reasonable deals.

Meeting yourself Warning: This post contains some spoilers about the movie “Coherence”. Imagine that, right now, through the door that is closest to you, someone walks in, and it is… you. A complete, full, physical double of yourself. This other you is as perplexed as you: similarly shocked to find a complete, full, physical double of itself. If you think this would merely be interesting and cool you probably have not seen the movie “Coherence”.

Intro and disclaimer I read this book with some friends. Someone had recommended it, and we felt that it was an appropriate time to reflect on what antisemitism has meant in the past, to better understand what it means in the present. At the start I was a bit sceptical about this contemporary relevance: after all, a lot has happened since Sartre wrote this book (written in 1944, published in 1946).

Today I was accused of “tokenization” in sharing this powerful essay by Masha Gessen on Mastodon (see the reactions under this post). Because of the character limit of a Mastodon post (at least on my server), I decided to turn my response into a little blog post. In short, the principle that I was accused of violating looks like this: as an outsider to a community, I should not share/boost the view of a minority of that community, when that view disqualifies the concerns that are held by the majority of that community.

Laat duidelijk zijn waar 1/4e van de Nederlandse kiezer voor gekozen heeft. Vandaag, in deze korte post, een greep uit de klimaatpunten uit het verkiezingsprogramma 2023 van de PVV (hier te downloaden): Geen miljardenuitgaven meer aan links-liberaal ideologisch beleid als stikstof en klimaat. Terugtrekken uit het VN-Klimaatakkoord; Klimaatwet intrekken. Het klimaat verandert altijd, al eeuwenlang. Bij veranderende omstandigheden passen we ons aan. Dat doen we door verstandig waterbeheer, door het verhogen van de dijken wanneer dat nodig is en door ruimte voor de rivier.

The current international order is like: Put your own oxygen mask on first, order a glass of wine, purchase something shiny from the duty free shop, watch your favourite movie, take a little nap, before assisting others. Mastodon post

In the spring of 2022, more than a hundred lecturers, organized under the banner of Casual UvA, laid down their marking work and joined a strike. Their demands were simple: 1) permanent contracts for structural work, 2) opportunities for professional development and 3) workload transparency. After several weeks, the University of Amsterdam presented a new teachers policy that was meant to address the core concerns and frustrations of its lecturers. In response, the lecturers agreed to suspend the strike, hoping that the new policy would be as effective and generous as the university’s central management claimed it would be.

Afgelopen maandag 16 januari bezette de UvA-tak van University Rebellion de Amsterdamse Academische Club. Uiteindelijk werd de ME ingezet om het gebouw te ontruimen. Voor sommigen is dat een logische stap: de activisten eigenen zich een plek toe die niet alleen aan hen toebehoort. “Dit is ook mijn gebouw, en zij representeren mij niet” zullen sommigen studenten en medewerkers gedacht hebben. Ergens begrijp ik dat sentiment: geen enkele subgroep binnen de UvA zou zich zomaar een deel van de universiteit moeten kunnen toe-eigenen.

I often hear people reject arguments in discussions as “whataboutisms”. The idea is that whataboutisms - “ok, you’re angry about thing A, but what about thing B and thing C” - effectively undermine any kind of critique. I understand this wariness. Especially when it is done on purpose and in bad faith, it is a dangerously easy way to kill any political talk.1 Still, I wonder why pointing out the ubiquity of injustice should necessarily lead to some kind of cynical fatalism.