Whamit!

This lecture will be based on two of my articles — in The Nation and in the Columbia Law Review — where I explore the silencing of Palestinian voices and the denial of their lived experiences. This silencing is spectacularly exemplified by two recent events related to my research and writing and which somewhat resembles the history of pushback against this MIT seminar on “Language & linguistics for decolonization & liberation & for peace & community building in Haiti, Palestine & Israel”:

I argue that these attempts at silencing are rooted in a colonial condition that, through language, underpins Western legal institutions and perpetuates the erasure of Palestinian narratives. By examining the intersections of language, law and colonialism, the lecture will highlight the urgent need to decolonize academic spaces and amplify marginalized voices in the pursuit of justice and liberation for Palestine — and, by extension, for other oppressed communities struggling for self-determination. 

 

The Columbia Law Review article introduces the concept of Nakba as a legal concept to encapsulate the ongoing subjugation of Palestinians. The Nakba, meaning “catastrophe” in Arabic, refers to the forced displacement of Palestinians and the establishment of Israel. I argue that Zionism and Nakba are mutually constitutive, as Zionism was a European political ideology that sought to solve antisemitism through the colonization of Palestine. I  call for the recognition of the Nakba and proposes a framework for undoing it through recognition, return, reparation, redistribution and reconstitution. 

 

As I wrote in The Nation, language holds the key to decolonization: ”Some may claim that the invocation of genocide, especially in Gaza, is fraught. But, does one have to wait for a genocide to be successfully completed to name it? This logic contributes to the politics of denial. When it comes to Gaza, there is a sense of moral hypocrisy that undergirds Western epistemological approaches, one which mutes the ability to name the violence inflicted upon Palestinians. But naming injustice is crucial to claiming justice.”   And the key question is posed at the end of that article: “Is genocide really the crime of all crimes if it is committed by Western allies against non-Western people? This is the most important question that Palestine continues to pose to the international legal order. Palestine brings to legal analysis an unmasking force: It unveils and reminds us of the ongoing colonial condition that underpins Western legal institutions. In Palestine, there are two categories: mournable civilians and savage. Palestine helps us rediscover that these categories remain along colonial lines in the 21st century: the first is reserved for Israelis, the latter for Palestinians. As Isaac Herzog, Israel’s supposedly liberal president asserts:  “It’s an entire nation out there that is responsible. This rhetoric about civilians not aware, not involved, it’s absolutely not true.” […] Palestine is the most vivid manifestation of the colonial condition upheld in the 21st century.” And language and linguistics, like the law, are necessary for our collective liberation.

For suggested readings in preparation of Rabea Eghbariah’s visit and for additional information about the seminar, please click here for the full description.