I have to admit, because it’s the unfortunate truth, that I’ve been fairly apathetic for most of my life when it came to matters of politics or going-ons in the world.
And thank you for your year-end review. I became a subscriber well into the year and missed many of the posts. I'll enjoy catching up and I look forward to reading what you write in 2024.
Great article! Politics is so much more than this-or-that election; it's about our society, our collective decisions, and the flourishing of human nature (as Aristotle would say). Human rights are universal, whether it's the Middle East or Eastern Europe.
For me, the balance between local and beyond is tough to strike. I think for me, as a high school teacher, knowledge of what’s going on outside of home helps me address questions and concerns for students since they’ll come across it on their own.
It's a great question. I've been taking a lot of care about the people around me and have been working on being more present, especially when they need help. But as for the larger community around me, I think there's more I can do.
Katherine, your clarity and honesty have always been an inspiration to me. You care more about truth than anyone I’ve come across in this whole community. I’ve never seen you let a bias get in the way of your quest for the facts, no matter where this may lead you. Thank you for being such an elegant person.
This means a tremendous amount to me to hear that. Thank you so much for taking the time to share this. It truly means a lot to me. And being called "an elegant person" is just so lovely. Thank you.
Hi Katherine - I enjoyed your article even if I don’t agree with your premise. I obviously applaud your commitment to free speech and to your increasing politicisation. However, there’s also a concern that, if one comes late to subjects which are, as you rightly say, politically (such as Israel/Palestine) is there not a danger you engage with the news of the subject without engaging with the history or the nuance? It’s obviously a contentious subject - but it seems, on some level, indicative of how we’ve got to this point that one manages to write an article focusing solely on the freedoms of one party in a two party dispute without questioning the historical oppression of the Palestinians or, for that matter, the Israelis at the hand of their own extremist government?
Thank you! To answer your question, I would say that before chiming in publicly on any issue, one must first study it sufficiently. I tend to not comment on things when I haven't taken the time to do so, and on particular points, I might say: "hey, this part I'm a bit less knowledgeable about." In the case of Israel/Palestine, I did know a fair bit already before the recent events, but I had some holes, so I took care to study the history, etc. Before doing so, I'd only comment on things that were precise. For example, if we're talking about internal Israeli politics, currently, I don't feel like I have enough background to really write anything of true substance, though I have some knowledge on the topic. Just not enough to feel like my contribution would be sufficiently valuable. I do know a bit more about the situation with Palestinians as I took a lot more time to study both ends of the argument, including speaking the Palestinians directly. My view isn't, by the way, that everything is perfectly great in the way they've been treated—only that there are other overwhelming factors that taint this conflict. Doesn't mean we don't need to do much better in some areas. So my point is, whether it's the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, or anything else, the "caring" should be a vehicle for learning more first...then one can decide if they have sufficient background to express themselves or take some other active role. The problem, in fact, is that too often people do not spend the time to learn first and they let emotions or populism alone drive their actions. And, it's important to also learn enough about the topic that you can vocalize the opposition's stance clearly before talking about your own. If you can strongarm their arguments, even better. There's a lot of absolutely lies, denial, and nonsense spewed around this conflict—same as with Ukraine—which I can debunk, but I also try to look for the stronger good faith arguments, of which there are some.
Hi Katherine. Thanks for you reply. My response would be that, again, while I respect the sentiment I’m not sure I can agree with the conclusion. I think anyone with any semblance of objective knowledge about the situation can’t come to any other conclusion that this is an extraordinary asymmetrical issue - which not only encompasses 75 years of oppression against the Palestinians but, also, is combined with the complete dehumanisation to the point that an obviously reasonable and intelligent individual can write an article about freedom while failing to mention that they’ve been living under an apartheid state since inception. That one can write about freedom while failing to mention that there are close to 10,000 Palestinians, many children, languishing in Israeli jails - and that the vast majority of the international community feels the same way except America which has more than enough self interest in the situation to mark them a deeply unreliable narrator in a war that has been waged against the Arab for at least the last 100 years if not before
I suspect we have come to different conclusions due to a different collection of facts. In the context of this post, I was referring to the current war. The rest of the issues can be delved in individually and are much more nuanced, and I suspect we'd have both areas of agreement and disagreement.
But there is no ‘current war’ - Israel and Palestine have been at war for 75 years. That’s the entire point of why one can’t read the news when the history is important. There has never been a peace treaty - how war ends - between Israel, Palestine & Lebanon - just a series of unstable ceasefire, of which the vast majority have been broken by Israel (you can fact check that). Within the context of the war, which forced almost 800,000 people from their home (referred to as the ethnic cleansing of Palestine by Israeli scholar Ilan Pappe) and has had a death rate of close to 90% Palestine, it seems rather important. Furthermore, there is a UN ratified two state solution which Hamas, in 2017, said they were willing to use as a basis for national consensus, recognising the role of the PA as well. Israel have never accepted it and, indeed, the charter of the current Likud Party, which morphed out of the terrorist group Irgun, calls for Israel from the river to the sea - an apparently genocidal chant. So, from those set of facts, I’ve come to the conclusion that I’m able to hold two different thoughts in my head. That the actions of October 7th were atrocities. The Palestinian cause is a worthy one - and, inadvertently, the actions of Netanyahu and his fascist government, of which two members have convictions for inciting terrorism by Israel itself, makes us closer to a two state solution than even before. We must support the millions of innocent Palestinians whose lives have been blighted by both Israel and Hamas - and work together to find a solution
Some of the facts you cite aren't quite accurate (particularly when it comes to the two state proposals/ceasefire — though the latter I need to look into more), and likewise on the idea of ethnic cleansing, but I'll have to respond another time when I'm not short on it as I'll need to do some citations. Just know that I'm not basing my thinking on just news, but also historical context. However, in the current context, the support of Israel is in light of Oct 7, which represented atrocities, something which we both agree on. I personally believe and have always believed in a two-state solution, and it sounds like you agree on that front too. Like you said, one can hold two thoughts at once...that there may be some injustice in how Palestinians are treated, and that Oct 7 represented atrocities that should not have been committed. I'd like nothing more than find solutions that would lead to peace, safety, prosperity, and dignity of both Palestinians and Israelis, and acknowledge that not all actions by Israel have been justified.
Thanks for your response - I’m not sure it’s fair to say that the facts are not quite accurate. It is true that there is a UN framework for a two state solution. It’s called pre-June ‘67. It’s also true that, in the new Hamas Document 2017, the organisation clearly state that they would accept that as a starting point for national consensus. It’s also true that the Likud Charter states from the river to the sea - as repeated by their representative Eli Cohen three days ago. There’s nothing controversial or nuanced in what I said. The same applies to what I said regarding the Nakba. The 1948 War forced close to 800,000 Palestinians out of their homes. That’s documented repeatedly. It’s also fact that Ilan Pappe has described it as an ethnic cleansing. Again, there is nothing controversial or nuanced in what I said.
And just to note, even though we have areas of disagreement, I can tell that you're arguing in good faith and so we need more conversations like this—both of us might discover something new.
Kinda think that that is rather like motherhood and apple pie -- I expect that pretty much everyone is in favour of social justice. The problem is what it consists of and how to get there -- rather too many are rather impractical at best, are unclear on the difference between being high-minded and being softheaded.
Entomologist E. O. Wilson had a rather brilliant quip on the point in speaking about Marxism which he considered more suited to ants than to humans:
If our theories, particularly on humans, are based on wishful thinking and various vanities then it we shouldn't be surprised if the societies or social policies based on them collapse like the proverbial house of cards. Or Towers of Babel ...
I have no idea why a couple of people seem mad at you for this. Someone seems upset that you didn't take his advice. Odd. Maybe people are upset because you said Social Justice Warrior? Lol. Anyway, you're right.
I've always cared about politics to an extent but the key for me if finding the 5% (or less) that's important. I live in California which is the land of nonsense laws and the nanny state. Some things are truly inane and a lot of politicians just like to hear themselves talk and posture. It's easy to get jaded but none of that means that certain things are not very important. You gave some really good examples. We have a duty (IMO) to at least be someone educated on the important things and on those things we should care and try to make a difference. In whatever ways we can we have to fight for what we believe is right and not just leave it in the hands of others. Despite what someone else said, writing actually does help. It helps contrast all of the lousy writing out there that people read daily. I think I have a bit of SJW in me as well but not in the woke/cancel culture kind of way :)
Perfect! Agree with You! I'm from Latvia, Riga. We support Ukraina and Israel, because my country was occupied from russia (1945-1994) . Hamas is similar anti human power. Thank You for Your Job! Sorry about my terrible english, but I will say You THANK YOU. All systems with agressiv thoughts=criminal regimes, not Countries.
I've always heard such great things about Latvia from my parents.
Really appreciate your support a lot! I'm always so happy when people are able to see through the propaganda, but those who have lived under the Russian occupation understand that country better than most.
Also, people in English speaking countries rarely know other languages well enough to communicate, whereas so many people in other countries have learned English, so I'm always impressed.
Mr. Davis is rude. Think of the character Will Hunting confronts in the bar with a history lesson. At least Hunting gave some knowledge of the subject. Davis is proving the point--why go to school? We are in class right now. The question is: "If we speak out about injustice, are we like the Leftist social justice fanatics?" Are we the same? No! Because we have different political goals. That answers the lovely, talented precious girl named Katherine's query. Who I love.
Perhaps it's worth reading her book before commenting on its impact? What Katherine excels in is modelling humility and approach to critical self-examination. She goes beyond articulating a problem, which many love to do, to also suggesting approaches that alleviate these problems without the arrogance of being 'the expert'. She endeavours to walk her talk and is the first to admit her flawed thinking or practice. Books are great but living evidence of wisdom in action is better. I think people expect far more from her than is reasonable and I wonder what it is about her that makes people think they can demand more/different from her than others.
There is a chasm between what you espouse is best practice and what you actually demonstrate in reality. I wish you well in your endeavours to be heard and understood, and have your authority respected. Wisdom says that in order to expect that from others, you have to be able to demonstrate it to them too. This is lacking in your self-indulgent rants that attempt to affirm your superiority over others who disagree with you.
Here is a piece that describes your conduct and the effect you have on others. Is this how you really want others to experience you or is there something that you might need to do to encourage people to want to connect with you?
You are correct. I didn't attempt to understand your perspective before commenting. This is something that contradicts my own principles and practice so I appreciate you confronting me about that. I too discuss emotional and psychological drivers of human behaviour that encourage self-aggrandizing, controlling and dominating behaviours (narcissism spectrum behaviours) and prevent cooperation, reciprocity and objectivity. Not examining one's behaviour and congruence with one's impact on others can reinforce these antisocial behaviours to preserve one's ideal self-perception. It's good to have an opportunity to reflect on this incongruence and make an effort to improve on my interactions.
Given that perspective taking seems to be valued by both of us, would you say that you followed your own advice in response to Katherine's article?
I appreciate the moral clarity of this essay.
And thank you for your year-end review. I became a subscriber well into the year and missed many of the posts. I'll enjoy catching up and I look forward to reading what you write in 2024.
Great article! Politics is so much more than this-or-that election; it's about our society, our collective decisions, and the flourishing of human nature (as Aristotle would say). Human rights are universal, whether it's the Middle East or Eastern Europe.
Fine. Use the term if you must but please don't go all out and start with the blue hair.
What about home? What will you do for that?
What do you mean? My own home?
The community of people around you in your offline life. Friends, family, and so on.
Good! I wish you luck branching out.
For me, the balance between local and beyond is tough to strike. I think for me, as a high school teacher, knowledge of what’s going on outside of home helps me address questions and concerns for students since they’ll come across it on their own.
That's a great perspective. I also think that your role as a teacher is one of the most important there is.
It's a great question. I've been taking a lot of care about the people around me and have been working on being more present, especially when they need help. But as for the larger community around me, I think there's more I can do.
Katherine, your clarity and honesty have always been an inspiration to me. You care more about truth than anyone I’ve come across in this whole community. I’ve never seen you let a bias get in the way of your quest for the facts, no matter where this may lead you. Thank you for being such an elegant person.
This means a tremendous amount to me to hear that. Thank you so much for taking the time to share this. It truly means a lot to me. And being called "an elegant person" is just so lovely. Thank you.
Hi Katherine - I enjoyed your article even if I don’t agree with your premise. I obviously applaud your commitment to free speech and to your increasing politicisation. However, there’s also a concern that, if one comes late to subjects which are, as you rightly say, politically (such as Israel/Palestine) is there not a danger you engage with the news of the subject without engaging with the history or the nuance? It’s obviously a contentious subject - but it seems, on some level, indicative of how we’ve got to this point that one manages to write an article focusing solely on the freedoms of one party in a two party dispute without questioning the historical oppression of the Palestinians or, for that matter, the Israelis at the hand of their own extremist government?
Thank you! To answer your question, I would say that before chiming in publicly on any issue, one must first study it sufficiently. I tend to not comment on things when I haven't taken the time to do so, and on particular points, I might say: "hey, this part I'm a bit less knowledgeable about." In the case of Israel/Palestine, I did know a fair bit already before the recent events, but I had some holes, so I took care to study the history, etc. Before doing so, I'd only comment on things that were precise. For example, if we're talking about internal Israeli politics, currently, I don't feel like I have enough background to really write anything of true substance, though I have some knowledge on the topic. Just not enough to feel like my contribution would be sufficiently valuable. I do know a bit more about the situation with Palestinians as I took a lot more time to study both ends of the argument, including speaking the Palestinians directly. My view isn't, by the way, that everything is perfectly great in the way they've been treated—only that there are other overwhelming factors that taint this conflict. Doesn't mean we don't need to do much better in some areas. So my point is, whether it's the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, or anything else, the "caring" should be a vehicle for learning more first...then one can decide if they have sufficient background to express themselves or take some other active role. The problem, in fact, is that too often people do not spend the time to learn first and they let emotions or populism alone drive their actions. And, it's important to also learn enough about the topic that you can vocalize the opposition's stance clearly before talking about your own. If you can strongarm their arguments, even better. There's a lot of absolutely lies, denial, and nonsense spewed around this conflict—same as with Ukraine—which I can debunk, but I also try to look for the stronger good faith arguments, of which there are some.
Hi Katherine. Thanks for you reply. My response would be that, again, while I respect the sentiment I’m not sure I can agree with the conclusion. I think anyone with any semblance of objective knowledge about the situation can’t come to any other conclusion that this is an extraordinary asymmetrical issue - which not only encompasses 75 years of oppression against the Palestinians but, also, is combined with the complete dehumanisation to the point that an obviously reasonable and intelligent individual can write an article about freedom while failing to mention that they’ve been living under an apartheid state since inception. That one can write about freedom while failing to mention that there are close to 10,000 Palestinians, many children, languishing in Israeli jails - and that the vast majority of the international community feels the same way except America which has more than enough self interest in the situation to mark them a deeply unreliable narrator in a war that has been waged against the Arab for at least the last 100 years if not before
I suspect we have come to different conclusions due to a different collection of facts. In the context of this post, I was referring to the current war. The rest of the issues can be delved in individually and are much more nuanced, and I suspect we'd have both areas of agreement and disagreement.
But there is no ‘current war’ - Israel and Palestine have been at war for 75 years. That’s the entire point of why one can’t read the news when the history is important. There has never been a peace treaty - how war ends - between Israel, Palestine & Lebanon - just a series of unstable ceasefire, of which the vast majority have been broken by Israel (you can fact check that). Within the context of the war, which forced almost 800,000 people from their home (referred to as the ethnic cleansing of Palestine by Israeli scholar Ilan Pappe) and has had a death rate of close to 90% Palestine, it seems rather important. Furthermore, there is a UN ratified two state solution which Hamas, in 2017, said they were willing to use as a basis for national consensus, recognising the role of the PA as well. Israel have never accepted it and, indeed, the charter of the current Likud Party, which morphed out of the terrorist group Irgun, calls for Israel from the river to the sea - an apparently genocidal chant. So, from those set of facts, I’ve come to the conclusion that I’m able to hold two different thoughts in my head. That the actions of October 7th were atrocities. The Palestinian cause is a worthy one - and, inadvertently, the actions of Netanyahu and his fascist government, of which two members have convictions for inciting terrorism by Israel itself, makes us closer to a two state solution than even before. We must support the millions of innocent Palestinians whose lives have been blighted by both Israel and Hamas - and work together to find a solution
Some of the facts you cite aren't quite accurate (particularly when it comes to the two state proposals/ceasefire — though the latter I need to look into more), and likewise on the idea of ethnic cleansing, but I'll have to respond another time when I'm not short on it as I'll need to do some citations. Just know that I'm not basing my thinking on just news, but also historical context. However, in the current context, the support of Israel is in light of Oct 7, which represented atrocities, something which we both agree on. I personally believe and have always believed in a two-state solution, and it sounds like you agree on that front too. Like you said, one can hold two thoughts at once...that there may be some injustice in how Palestinians are treated, and that Oct 7 represented atrocities that should not have been committed. I'd like nothing more than find solutions that would lead to peace, safety, prosperity, and dignity of both Palestinians and Israelis, and acknowledge that not all actions by Israel have been justified.
Thanks for your response - I’m not sure it’s fair to say that the facts are not quite accurate. It is true that there is a UN framework for a two state solution. It’s called pre-June ‘67. It’s also true that, in the new Hamas Document 2017, the organisation clearly state that they would accept that as a starting point for national consensus. It’s also true that the Likud Charter states from the river to the sea - as repeated by their representative Eli Cohen three days ago. There’s nothing controversial or nuanced in what I said. The same applies to what I said regarding the Nakba. The 1948 War forced close to 800,000 Palestinians out of their homes. That’s documented repeatedly. It’s also fact that Ilan Pappe has described it as an ethnic cleansing. Again, there is nothing controversial or nuanced in what I said.
And just to note, even though we have areas of disagreement, I can tell that you're arguing in good faith and so we need more conversations like this—both of us might discover something new.
"A social justice warrior?" Oh, the horror! 😉🙂
Kinda think that that is rather like motherhood and apple pie -- I expect that pretty much everyone is in favour of social justice. The problem is what it consists of and how to get there -- rather too many are rather impractical at best, are unclear on the difference between being high-minded and being softheaded.
Entomologist E. O. Wilson had a rather brilliant quip on the point in speaking about Marxism which he considered more suited to ants than to humans:
"Wonderful theory, wrong species."
https://en.wikiquote.org/wiki/E._O._Wilson
If our theories, particularly on humans, are based on wishful thinking and various vanities then it we shouldn't be surprised if the societies or social policies based on them collapse like the proverbial house of cards. Or Towers of Babel ...
I have no idea why a couple of people seem mad at you for this. Someone seems upset that you didn't take his advice. Odd. Maybe people are upset because you said Social Justice Warrior? Lol. Anyway, you're right.
I've always cared about politics to an extent but the key for me if finding the 5% (or less) that's important. I live in California which is the land of nonsense laws and the nanny state. Some things are truly inane and a lot of politicians just like to hear themselves talk and posture. It's easy to get jaded but none of that means that certain things are not very important. You gave some really good examples. We have a duty (IMO) to at least be someone educated on the important things and on those things we should care and try to make a difference. In whatever ways we can we have to fight for what we believe is right and not just leave it in the hands of others. Despite what someone else said, writing actually does help. It helps contrast all of the lousy writing out there that people read daily. I think I have a bit of SJW in me as well but not in the woke/cancel culture kind of way :)
Perfect! Agree with You! I'm from Latvia, Riga. We support Ukraina and Israel, because my country was occupied from russia (1945-1994) . Hamas is similar anti human power. Thank You for Your Job! Sorry about my terrible english, but I will say You THANK YOU. All systems with agressiv thoughts=criminal regimes, not Countries.
I've always heard such great things about Latvia from my parents.
Really appreciate your support a lot! I'm always so happy when people are able to see through the propaganda, but those who have lived under the Russian occupation understand that country better than most.
Your English is great (Ukrainian here 😁) and your heart is warm and human.
Thank You! #StandWithUcraine
That's the most important part!
Also, people in English speaking countries rarely know other languages well enough to communicate, whereas so many people in other countries have learned English, so I'm always impressed.
(PS. I'm also from Ukraine originally)
Better than being a social injustice warrior!
Mr. Davis is rude. Think of the character Will Hunting confronts in the bar with a history lesson. At least Hunting gave some knowledge of the subject. Davis is proving the point--why go to school? We are in class right now. The question is: "If we speak out about injustice, are we like the Leftist social justice fanatics?" Are we the same? No! Because we have different political goals. That answers the lovely, talented precious girl named Katherine's query. Who I love.
Perhaps it's worth reading her book before commenting on its impact? What Katherine excels in is modelling humility and approach to critical self-examination. She goes beyond articulating a problem, which many love to do, to also suggesting approaches that alleviate these problems without the arrogance of being 'the expert'. She endeavours to walk her talk and is the first to admit her flawed thinking or practice. Books are great but living evidence of wisdom in action is better. I think people expect far more from her than is reasonable and I wonder what it is about her that makes people think they can demand more/different from her than others.
Dear Rick,
There is a chasm between what you espouse is best practice and what you actually demonstrate in reality. I wish you well in your endeavours to be heard and understood, and have your authority respected. Wisdom says that in order to expect that from others, you have to be able to demonstrate it to them too. This is lacking in your self-indulgent rants that attempt to affirm your superiority over others who disagree with you.
Here is a piece that describes your conduct and the effect you have on others. Is this how you really want others to experience you or is there something that you might need to do to encourage people to want to connect with you?
https://nathaliemartinekphd.substack.com/p/ego
I won't respond to any more of your comments.
Dear Richard,
You are correct. I didn't attempt to understand your perspective before commenting. This is something that contradicts my own principles and practice so I appreciate you confronting me about that. I too discuss emotional and psychological drivers of human behaviour that encourage self-aggrandizing, controlling and dominating behaviours (narcissism spectrum behaviours) and prevent cooperation, reciprocity and objectivity. Not examining one's behaviour and congruence with one's impact on others can reinforce these antisocial behaviours to preserve one's ideal self-perception. It's good to have an opportunity to reflect on this incongruence and make an effort to improve on my interactions.
Given that perspective taking seems to be valued by both of us, would you say that you followed your own advice in response to Katherine's article?
She is wonderful.