This is just a brief addendum to my video on Zoe and Bios and I try to answer here if the concepts can be used within the context of Israel-Palestine conflict.
I think there are two points that might be a jumping off point for further debate and discussion. First, zoe and bios can be applied to all settler colonial projects, no just the Israeli one. Indeed, Australia and America are far more successful cases of native removal than Israel probably ever will be. Second, while native peoples in Australia and the US have basically been eliminated as meaningful sociopolitical communities, they have regained a form of bios in formal public discourse. Almost every lecture in Australian universities begins with a recognition that the event is taking place on native land. I live in Cambridge, MA and many universities in New England are starting to do this same thing. But discursive recognitions of bios do not negate the continuing zoe of most indigenous peoples in settler colonies.
The ONLY native people of the land of ISRAEL are the ISRAELIS. Israel belongs to the indigenous Hebrews, it is the Arabs who colonized the land of the hebrews, not the other way around. The Israelis are the only case study of an ancient indigenous population who succeeded in getting their land back, an inspiring example for all indigenous people across the world.
My thesis looked at settler colonial structures and pedagogies in the educational context of language acculturation and citizenship in Canada that are in essence extensions of the residential schooling pedagogies (colonial language, acculturation, high-stakes testing). I never intended to do graduate work, however my teaching colleagues fail to see these connections in our teaching and texts; I would say primarily because of the settler colonial lens. As part of my thesis, I talk about the performativity of the land acknowledgements. Most people do not know what "unceded" land means or its implications or its traumatized histories. Furthermore, an institution acknowledging stolen land is not an act of reconciliation because the institution is not a person, so it cannot take action. In continuation of this issue, I wanted to speak about Israel-Palestine in my thesis project as an example of the settler colonial lens that does not recognize settler colonial structures even though for example, the Rome Statute states settlements are war crimes. One of my professors made me remove it not because they disagreed, because they said, your work won't be recognized. I told them, but you bring it up, and they said, I can because I am tenured and I will be retiring soon.
I think there are two points that might be a jumping off point for further debate and discussion. First, zoe and bios can be applied to all settler colonial projects, no just the Israeli one. Indeed, Australia and America are far more successful cases of native removal than Israel probably ever will be. Second, while native peoples in Australia and the US have basically been eliminated as meaningful sociopolitical communities, they have regained a form of bios in formal public discourse. Almost every lecture in Australian universities begins with a recognition that the event is taking place on native land. I live in Cambridge, MA and many universities in New England are starting to do this same thing. But discursive recognitions of bios do not negate the continuing zoe of most indigenous peoples in settler colonies.
Yes, these are all really good initiatives. Thank you for sharing.
The ONLY native people of the land of ISRAEL are the ISRAELIS. Israel belongs to the indigenous Hebrews, it is the Arabs who colonized the land of the hebrews, not the other way around. The Israelis are the only case study of an ancient indigenous population who succeeded in getting their land back, an inspiring example for all indigenous people across the world.
My thesis looked at settler colonial structures and pedagogies in the educational context of language acculturation and citizenship in Canada that are in essence extensions of the residential schooling pedagogies (colonial language, acculturation, high-stakes testing). I never intended to do graduate work, however my teaching colleagues fail to see these connections in our teaching and texts; I would say primarily because of the settler colonial lens. As part of my thesis, I talk about the performativity of the land acknowledgements. Most people do not know what "unceded" land means or its implications or its traumatized histories. Furthermore, an institution acknowledging stolen land is not an act of reconciliation because the institution is not a person, so it cannot take action. In continuation of this issue, I wanted to speak about Israel-Palestine in my thesis project as an example of the settler colonial lens that does not recognize settler colonial structures even though for example, the Rome Statute states settlements are war crimes. One of my professors made me remove it not because they disagreed, because they said, your work won't be recognized. I told them, but you bring it up, and they said, I can because I am tenured and I will be retiring soon.
@@yellowporsche8172 Thank you for sharing your thoughts. I would love to read your thesis. Let me know if there is a digital copy.
@@masoodraja I sent an email. I am so honoured.
Thank you so much sir 🙏for your video 🙏🙏🙏🙏
You are welcome
❤️