Gallup - 46% of Americans sympathize more with Israel than Palestine, lowest in at least 25 years

[Horus]

This issue is also very much a thermostatic one. is. Before 10/7 there was a Palestinian shift but it was very gradual. If the news shifts from Palestinians being killed in Gaza to suicide bombings in Tel Aviv, it shifts public opinion toward the Israel

That said, the left will never have a winning message on I/P until it ditches the idea of eliminating Israel. There are quite a few Dems who believe Israel has gone overboard and sympathize with Palestinian children but to the chagrin of the academic left, are unlikely to get on board with anything other than a 2 state solution.

There's maybe one Dem in Congress, Tlaib, who has pushed for a one state solution. Meanwhile the GOP caucus is now calling it Judea and Samaria. And it's the left that's going too far here? You boomers just don't get it.

[Devils30]

This issue is also very much a thermostatic one. is. Before 10/7 there was a Palestinian shift but it was very gradual. If the news shifts from Palestinians being killed in Gaza to suicide bombings in Tel Aviv, it shifts public opinion toward the Israel

That said, the left will never have a winning message on I/P until it ditches the idea of eliminating Israel. There are quite a few Dems who believe Israel has gone overboard and sympathize with Palestinian children but to the chagrin of the academic left, are unlikely to get on board with anything other than a 2 state solution.

There's maybe one Dem in Congress, Tlaib, who has pushed for a one state solution. Meanwhile the GOP caucus is now calling it Judea and Samaria. And it's the left that's going too far here? You boomers just don't get it.

But unfortunately she is the one that these protestors echo at all moments. But you do not see most progressives making proposals on maps/details of a two state solution. Unfortunately, the quality of Democratic staffers has markedly deteriorated and very few of them are problem fixers.

Most pro-Israel Americans aren't for annexing the West Bank, it would be a bad idea and make the two state solution harder. And I am not a boomer.

[coloradocowboi]

As an academic, I just want to say it's not about being "influenced." In fact, there is heavy pressure on all of us to keep quiet about this issue. But when you are trained to look at things objectively, it's very difficult not to see that Israel have responded disproportionately and without regard to diplomatic norms or even human rights norms since the 1970s. If anything, it's the ability to see through propaganda that makes academia a bastion of pro-Palestine sympathy.

Academic humanities and social sciences are the intellectual centers of post-modern thought that outright rejects the idea that one can view things "objectively" in the first place.

You’ve been listening to too much Jordan Peterson lol

[Sic Semper Tyrannis]

As an academic, I just want to say it's not about being "influenced." In fact, there is heavy pressure on all of us to keep quiet about this issue. But when you are trained to look at things objectively, it's very difficult not to see that Israel have responded disproportionately and without regard to diplomatic norms or even human rights norms since the 1970s. If anything, it's the ability to see through propaganda that makes academia a bastion of pro-Palestine sympathy.

Academic humanities and social sciences are the intellectual centers of post-modern thought that outright rejects the idea that one can view things "objectively" in the first place.

You’ve been listening to too much Jordan Peterson lol

Post-modernist rejection of the existence of objective truth is a hell of a lot better than your weird tendency to mistake your subjective evaluation of something for objective truth. jordan peterson's problems are all a product of his delusional inability to accept the subjective nature of reality.

[○∙◄☻¥tπ[╪AV┼cVê└]

As an academic, I just want to say it's not about being "influenced." In fact, there is heavy pressure on all of us to keep quiet about this issue. But when you are trained to look at things objectively, it's very difficult not to see that Israel have responded disproportionately and without regard to diplomatic norms or even human rights norms since the 1970s. If anything, it's the ability to see through propaganda that makes academia a bastion of pro-Palestine sympathy.

Academic humanities and social sciences are the intellectual centers of post-modern thought that outright rejects the idea that one can view things "objectively" in the first place.

You’ve been listening to too much Jordan Peterson lol

Post-modernist rejection of the existence of objective truth is a hell of a lot better than your weird tendency to mistake your subjective evaluation of something for objective truth. jordan peterson's problems are all a product of his delusional inability to accept the subjective nature of reality.

There are still objective truths. I'm sure some other civilization somewhere in the universe discovered  the importance of pi and e.

[politicallefty]

The thing to remember about the ongoing political formation of young Americans is that they have never known an Israel whose government doesn't very openly align itself with what has become of our Republican Party.

That depresses opinion among young Democrats, and, since young Republicans are mostly America First chauvinists, they're never going to be much of a counterweight to that.

It's worse than that though. Netanyahu himself has been in power for nearly a generation now. He's a smug, arrogant, power-hungry tyrant that would just as soon wipe out every last Palestinian if he could get away with it. I don't throw the word 'evil' around very often, but I do feel like he fits the bill to the letter. I don't think any Israeli leader is going to be popular with the left in this country considering how the war in Gaza has been conducted, but Netanyahu is a particular level of awfulness. I myself cannot sympathize with Israel when he is allowed to rule for this long.

[coloradocowboi]

As an academic, I just want to say it's not about being "influenced." In fact, there is heavy pressure on all of us to keep quiet about this issue. But when you are trained to look at things objectively, it's very difficult not to see that Israel have responded disproportionately and without regard to diplomatic norms or even human rights norms since the 1970s. If anything, it's the ability to see through propaganda that makes academia a bastion of pro-Palestine sympathy.

Academic humanities and social sciences are the intellectual centers of post-modern thought that outright rejects the idea that one can view things "objectively" in the first place.

You’ve been listening to too much Jordan Peterson lol

Post-modernist rejection of the existence of objective truth is a hell of a lot better than your weird tendency to mistake your subjective evaluation of something for objective truth. jordan peterson's problems are all a product of his delusional inability to accept the subjective nature of reality.

There are still objective truths. I'm sure some other civilization somewhere in the universe discovered  the importance of pi and e.

It goes far beyond pi and mathematics. As a Marxist and as a practitioner of Buddhism, I don’t believe anything but “objectivity” exists. And in my fields of study, I think my position is far more common than what users here are calling “postmodernism.” For example, I hear the word “social construction” all the time on Reddit still but haven’t heard it in a classroom or at a conference probably in 10 years. Maybe the reason Jordan Peterson is so caught up on postmodernism is that he hasn’t really been respected or even really involved in his field for a long time himself lol…

Outside of literary and theater studies, “postmodernism” is pretty passé at this point. And in those fields, it still has relevance because of the pioneering and extremely thought provoking work of Jacques Derrida.

[Sic Semper Tyrannis]

It goes far beyond pi and mathematics. As a Marxist and as a practitioner of Buddhism, I don’t believe anything but “objectivity” exists.

That's stupid. I'm not going to pretend the existence of subjectivity is something that reasonable people can disagree on. Especially when one's only argument against it is their religion and their outdated political philosophy.

And in my fields of study, I think my position is far more common than what users here are calling “postmodernism.” For example, I hear the word “social construction” all the time on Reddit still but haven’t heard it in a classroom or at a conference probably in 10 years. Maybe the reason Jordan Peterson is so caught up on postmodernism is that he hasn’t really been respected or even really involved in his field for a long time himself lol…

Please tell me your fields of study so I know what academic fields to treat as untrustworthy.

jordan peterson is caught up on his strawman version of post-modernism because postmodernism is uniquely destructive to his ideology which relies on insisting his idiotic subjective ideas are somehow objectively true. Hard to fetishize "western civilization" as this ultimate objective good if you understand that the very concept is a human construction.

Outside of literary and theater studies, “postmodernism” is pretty passé at this point. And in those fields, it still has relevance because of the pioneering and extremely thought provoking work of Jacques Derrida.

Imagine dismissing a form of thought by calling it "passe" unironically. Especially when you just unironically called yourself a Marxist. And especially when you being a Marxist and a Buddhist was the closest thing you've given to an actual argument about the merits of postmodernism. You are a perfect caricature of the criticisms people have about academia.

[coloradocowboi]

It goes far beyond pi and mathematics. As a Marxist and as a practitioner of Buddhism, I don’t believe anything but “objectivity” exists.

That's stupid. I'm not going to pretend the existence of subjectivity is something that reasonable people can disagree on. Especially when one's only argument against it is their religion and their outdated political philosophy.

And in my fields of study, I think my position is far more common than what users here are calling “postmodernism.” For example, I hear the word “social construction” all the time on Reddit still but haven’t heard it in a classroom or at a conference probably in 10 years. Maybe the reason Jordan Peterson is so caught up on postmodernism is that he hasn’t really been respected or even really involved in his field for a long time himself lol…

Please tell me your fields of study so I know what academic fields to treat as untrustworthy.

jordan peterson is caught up on his strawman version of post-modernism because postmodernism is uniquely destructive to his ideology which relies on insisting his idiotic subjective ideas are somehow objectively true. Hard to fetishize "western civilization" as this ultimate objective good if you understand that the very concept is a human construction.

Outside of literary and theater studies, “postmodernism” is pretty passé at this point. And in those fields, it still has relevance because of the pioneering and extremely thought provoking work of Jacques Derrida.

Imagine dismissing a form of thought by calling it "passe" unironically. Especially when you just unironically called yourself a Marxist. And especially when you being a Marxist and a Buddhist was the closest thing you've given to an actual argument about the merits of postmodernism. You are a perfect caricature of the criticisms people have about academia.

Postmodernism isn't a form of thought. It's an historical era in intellectualism and art. Calling it passe isn't dismissal unless you feel dismissed whenever the clock strikes a new hour lol...

You always react in a manner that is full of vitriol and logical fallacies for the mere crime of disagreeing with whatever graduate program gave you your patented "postmodern" belief system. Nowhere did I say any of the bolded part, so I won't even bother responding to you because it's so insanely personal and I don't really care what you think about anything if this is how you argue

What I will correct this once before muting you once more is that subjectivity exists, okay *applause*, but that it has nothing to do with formal study. It cannot be operationalized, correlated to any discrete phenomenon, and as such it has limited value beyond graduate student "what if" questions in the social sciences or, for that matter, anybody in the humanities who aspires to do more than Scarlet does and snark about whose personal definitions of what words mean are superior.  

"Subjectivity" is the kind of individualist-fetishism that suggests that somebody's "close reading" of an obscure text has the same kind of epistemic value as an ethnography of a watershed. And if my fellow academics here can't see that our fetishization of our subjectivities and identities has made us completely unrelatable and frankly unlikable to any normal person, all the while diverting attention away from critical research on social priorities, they are welcome to go to war with Jordan Peterson on behalf of what they themselves, apparently, admit is a strawman. Or is it?

I wouldn't know, as again I'm a tenure-track social scientist with a rigorous publication schedule and record and not going to play this game with y'all again.

[Sic Semper Tyrannis]

It goes far beyond pi and mathematics. As a Marxist and as a practitioner of Buddhism, I don’t believe anything but “objectivity” exists.

That's stupid. I'm not going to pretend the existence of subjectivity is something that reasonable people can disagree on. Especially when one's only argument against it is their religion and their outdated political philosophy.

And in my fields of study, I think my position is far more common than what users here are calling “postmodernism.” For example, I hear the word “social construction” all the time on Reddit still but haven’t heard it in a classroom or at a conference probably in 10 years. Maybe the reason Jordan Peterson is so caught up on postmodernism is that he hasn’t really been respected or even really involved in his field for a long time himself lol…

Please tell me your fields of study so I know what academic fields to treat as untrustworthy.

jordan peterson is caught up on his strawman version of post-modernism because postmodernism is uniquely destructive to his ideology which relies on insisting his idiotic subjective ideas are somehow objectively true. Hard to fetishize "western civilization" as this ultimate objective good if you understand that the very concept is a human construction.

Outside of literary and theater studies, “postmodernism” is pretty passé at this point. And in those fields, it still has relevance because of the pioneering and extremely thought provoking work of Jacques Derrida.

Imagine dismissing a form of thought by calling it "passe" unironically. Especially when you just unironically called yourself a Marxist. And especially when you being a Marxist and a Buddhist was the closest thing you've given to an actual argument about the merits of postmodernism. You are a perfect caricature of the criticisms people have about academia.

Postmodernism isn't a form of thought. It's an historical era in intellectualism and art. Calling it passe isn't dismissal unless you feel dismissed whenever the clock strikes a new hour lol...

You always react in a manner that is full of vitriol and logical fallacies for the mere crime of disagreeing with whatever graduate program gave you your patented "postmodern" belief system.

I'm not an academic. I have no college degree. I do know that "passe" has clear negative connotations though.

Nowhere did I say any of the bolded part, so I won't even bother responding to you because it's so insanely personal and I don't really care what you think about anything if this is how you argue

As a Marxist and as a practitioner of Buddhism, I don’t believe anything but “objectivity” exists.

You pretty clearly did though.

What I will correct this once before muting you once more is that subjectivity exists, okay *applause*, but that it has nothing to do with formal study. It cannot be operationalized, correlated to any discrete phenomenon, and as such it has limited value beyond graduate student "what if" questions in the social sciences or, for that matter, anybody in the humanities who aspires to do more than Scarlet does and snark about whose personal definitions of what words mean are superior.  

"Subjectivity" is the kind of individualist-fetishism that suggests that somebody's "close reading" of an obscure text has the same kind of epistemic value as an ethnography of a watershed. And if my fellow academics here can't see that our fetishization of our subjectivities and identities has made us completely unrelatable and frankly unlikable to any normal person, all the while diverting attention away from critical research on social priorities, they are welcome to go to war with Jordan Peterson on behalf of what they themselves, apparently, admit is a strawman. Or is it?

I wouldn't know, as again I'm a tenure-track social scientist with a rigorous publication schedule and record and not going to play this game with y'all again.

You're making it extremely obvious that you have no clue what the important parts of postmodernist thought actually are, and how it influences one's approach to understanding human societies.

[GALeftist]

Here's something I truly don't understand: why is it that Israel is always treated like a smol bean who needs to be protected from anyone, let alone rando activists, saying it ought not to exist? It is a nuclear effing power, people. This isn't the 50s anymore. It does not need protection from jack, we need protection from its emerging illiberal axis with Russia and Hungary and the GOP and the like.