RESISTANCE REACHES THE CORE OF THE ZIONIST REGIME | REPRESSION WON'T DIVIDE US | MOBILIZE THE MASSES TO ACHIEVE VICTORY
Contents:
I. OUR MOVEMENT WILL NOT REST, BUT YOU SHOULD: TRUST THE MASSES TO CARRY THE FIGHT!
II. NOWHERE TO HIDE: RESISTANCE REACHES THE CORE OF THE ZIONIST REGIME
III. REPRESSION WON’T DIVIDE US: LESSONS FROM POLITICAL PRISONERS
IV. READER SUBMISSION: BETWEEN AN OLIGARCHY AND A LUXURY GOODS BRAND
V. A READER’S RESPONSE TO REPORTING ON THE RESISTANCE AS PROGRESSIVE
OUR MOVEMENT WILL NOT REST, BUT YOU SHOULD: TRUST THE MASSES TO CARRY THE FIGHT!
With the start of the new semester, our organizational work will inevitably intensify. Being part of the student movement means that on top of classes, internships, and jobs, we must stay committed to attending meetings and actions, as well as sharpening our consciousness through regular reading and reflections.
Though the pace can feel relentless, this is precisely the moment to remind ourselves that our strength lies within the collective power of the masses. From the first encampment, the chant Disclose! Divest! We will not stop! We will not rest! has echoed through our movement. But what does this chant mean? As individuals, rest is essential. However, the power of organization is that we—as an aspiring mass movement—can continue the fight even when some of us rest or take breaks.
Vladimir Lenin said that the working class has no weapon but organization, meaning that only through ideological consolidation and organized action can the masses overcome imperialism. Our movement has much to learn from his conception of collective power. Yes, Columbia has a multi-billion-dollar endowment. They have proven they are willing to unleash the state on us in the most grotesque ways. But their use of the police signifies their weakness—namely, that they are unable to squash our movement through peaceful means. So, they must resort to open force and the spectacle of terror, which only further isolates them. The administration has no significant support among students, staff, or faculty that it can mobilize against dissent. Thus, they bring in the police to do their dirty work. Meanwhile, the basis of our ability to win our demands is through the mobilization, politicization, and organization of thousands of Columbia affiliates and supporters in the community.
What does it mean to mobilize that masses? It means that this semester, we should work diligently to make new connections and strengthen existing ones based on common demands. We should fight alongside organizations in Harlem that share our demands of weakening our university's imperialist pursuits. The broader our base, the bigger and more impactful our actions and the more we can evenly distribute labor.
As Mao Zedong reminds us, "However active the leading group may be, its activity will amount to fruitless effort by a handful of people unless combined with the activity of the masses. On the other hand, if the masses alone are active without a strong leading group to organize their activity properly, such activity cannot be sustained for long, or carried forward in the right direction, or raised to a high level." We cannot succeed through the sheer will of leadership alone, nor only from the spontaneous actions of the masses. We need both—a strong, principled leadership to guide our efforts rooted in and combined with the collective energy of the masses to drive our movement forward.
Columbia and the imperialists they represent and benefit are powerful. We cannot expect a quick victory. Our struggle, like any struggle that weakens imperialism, will be protracted. It's important to trust our comrades—trust that they will carry on in our absence. Missing a meeting or taking time to eat, exercise, etc. are necessary aspects of sustaining ourselves. Leaving some of the myriad signal chats we are in to dedicate more time to just a few will improve our quality of work and give us more time to sustain our energy and commitment over the long term.
The notion that 'rest is revolutionary' is often deployed by liberals to excuse inaction. However, what is truly needed is a scientific approach to rest, one that understands its connection to activity—where activity is primary, and rest serves to support it. Those who argue that rest is inherently revolutionary mistakenly place it above activity, overlooking that progress comes through active struggle, with rest serving to replenish the capacity for such action. Conversely, those who dismiss the importance of rest and rely solely on willpower believe they can overcome the material limits of the body. This mindset often leads to burnout, causing them to swing from the extreme of relentless activity to the extreme of complete rest.
Revolution and rebellion are demanding and active endeavors. They require discipline, sacrifice, and principled commitment. We must be smart with how we manage our energy. Rest, exercise, and nourishment are crucial to keep our fervor alive and our movement strong. Taking breaks is not surrendering but rather a tactical pause that ensures that we can continue fighting. This relies on a collective understanding of rest and activity: that no single individual is essential to the movement, and that individual rest should serve collective activity. There is a difference between rest that is self-serving and rest that serves the collective. Rest must not be an excuse to avoid activity, but a way to develop it.
Some comrades need discipline to increase their efforts, while others need to be disciplined in their approach to taking care of themselves. Being intentional with how we balance action and rest allows us to fortify ourselves and our movement, ensuring that we can continue this work with the vigor and dedication it requires.
NOWHERE TO HIDE: RESISTANCE REACHES THE CORE OF THE ZIONIST REGIME
An estimated 186,000 Palestinians have been killed since October 7 last year. We are approaching one year since the genocide of Palestinians escalated following resistance led by Hamas against Israel’s continued violent occupation.
Israel continues its attack on vulnerable Palestinians. At least 15 people were killed in an IOF attack on Jabalia’s Hafsa al-Faluja School. On Sunday, a UN shelter school was attacked, killing four Palestinians. Schools in Gaza are being used to shelter families. At least 10 schools have been hit this September alone. Millions of people have been displaced due to Israeli bombardment, now adding over one million people in Lebanon while nonstop bombing occurs. No medical supplies are able to make it to Gaza since the IOF took over the Philadelphi Corridor, and in Lebanon, 14 medics have been killed in two days. The intentional blocking and destruction of humanitarian aid by Israel continues in Palestine and Lebanon. On Sunday, Israel targeted a power plant and oil facilities in Yemen, attacking the Yemeni port city of Hodeidah and Ras Issa. Yemeni Houthis emptied the fuel storage facilities in the two locations as precaution for Israeli bombardment. In response to the attack, Israel’s Gallant sadistically boasted that “no place is too far” for Israeli attack. On Tuesday, October 1, Israeli attacks killed 55 in Lebanon while a ground invasion ensues.
Hassan Nasrallah’s martyrdom occurred in service of the liberation of Palestine. The secretary general of the Lebanese resistance group was confirmed assassinated by Israel by Hezbollah on Saturday, September 28. Israel likely used U.S.-made BLU-109s, which are 2000 pounds, carried on fighter jets to carry out the attack that killed Nasrallah. This follows the pager and walkie-talkie attacks from Israel and the series of assassinations of other Hezbollah resistance leaders. More than 1000 people are dead since Monday in Lebanon, and Israeli warplanes continue to bombard the densely populated, southern Dahiyeh area of Beirut. Many families have been forced to flee since Friday, September 27. The IOF continues to conduct raids in Lebanon.
Israel’s occupation ministry says that it has secured more than $8.7 billion in US military aid. Over $5 billion of this will go towards upgrading air defense systems, including the Iron Dome.
While the enemy continues to bombard Palestine and Lebanon, Hezbollah has defended itself and its neighbor in response, firing more than 130 rockets into Israel earlier this week, achieving direct impact in Tel Aviv and settler-occupied Palestine. Israeli forces withdrew from Jenin in the West Bank after a 15-hour raid in which Israeli Occupation Forces clashed with Palestinian Resistance. A spokesperson for the Houthi resistance group says the group launched an attack on Israel’s Ben Gurion airport. On Saturday, sirens sounded near Eilat in Israel hours after the Islamic Resistance in Iraq claimed to have fired drones. On Sunday, Hezbollah fired a series of Fadi 1 rockets at the Ofek military base in Israel and targeted Israel’s Sa’ar settlement with rockets. Iran’s parliament speaker, Mohammad Bagher Ghalibaf, said Hezbollah will not collapse as a result of killing the group’s leaders. On Tuesday, October 1, Iran fired about 200 ballistic missiles at Israel in response to the recent killings of Hamas's Haniyeh, Hezbollah's Nasrallah, and Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps leaders and General Abbas Nilforousha, and the continued invasions of Palestine and Lebanon.
The United States has called for a cease-fire in Lebanon following this week and last week's attacks by Israel. Despite this, President Joe Biden, Vice President Kamala Harris, and Republican House Speaker Mike Johnson have expressed support for Israel’s continued bombardment of Lebanon and assassination of Hezbollah leader Hassan Nasrallah, despite the significant civilian death toll. In response to Iran's actions of defense on Tuesday, President Joe Biden pledged unwavering support for Israel and warned Iran of serious consequences.
This week, Netanyahu appeared at the 79th annual meeting of the UN General Assembly. The UN received this war criminal despite his contrarian nature to all goals the UN claims to uphold: maintain peace, protect human rights, deliver humanitarian aid, support sustainability, and uphold international law. Under his authority, the IOF bombs hospitals, schools, neighborhoods, and families, imposes famine, murders journalists, activists, and prisoners, desecrates Islamic and Christian holy sites, and steals Palestinian land. Israel violates the UN’s charter, and the blatant refusal to hold Netanyahu, Israel, and its accomplices accountable will lead to further destruction.
On October 1, in a significant act of resistance, a shooting took place in Tel Aviv, targeting Israeli security forces and settlers. This bold attack comes amid the ongoing escalation of violence in the region and highlights the growing resolve of those resisting Israeli occupation. The shooting serves as a reminder that the struggle is not confined to Gaza or Lebanon but has now reached deep into the heart of settler-colonial territory, further destabilizing the Zionist regime's claims to security and control.
Later on the night of October 1, a significant leap in the resistance occurred when Iran launched ballistic missile strikes directly targeting Tel Aviv, marking a critical escalation in the confrontation with the Zionist regime. This bold move signifies a turning point in the region’s resistance to Israeli occupation and aggression. The missile strikes follow an intensified wave of assaults by Israel on Gaza, Lebanon, and Yemen, as well as the assassinations of key resistance leaders, including Hamas's Haniyeh, Hezbollah's Nasrallah, and Iranian military figures. The targeting of Tel Aviv with precision strikes demonstrates the increasing reach and capability of the Axis of Resistance.
REPRESSION WON’T DIVIDE US: LESSONS FROM POLITICAL PRISONERS
At our last reading group, we read several articles on Black and Palestinian political prisoners and watched one video on the Attica Prison Riot.
Previously, we discussed the taking of political prisoners as a manifestation of the state's attempt to divide working-class people and fracture revolutionary movements. One comrade began the conversation by referencing Sekou Odinga’s advice: "Young people need to know that they can't do it alone. They need to be organized, and they need to be clear about what their goals are. They need to be goal-oriented, and to have long-term and short-term goals. Short-term goals, of course, need to be conducive to accomplishing the long-term goals."
This comrade mentioned that clarifying this process of goal-setting is a helpful way to move forward and approach our struggles scientifically, with each small goal bringing more people into the struggle, allowing them to gain confidence through experience, and make large goals seem more achievable.
While this approach instilled optimism, reading about the ubiquitousness of state repression across these articles instilled dread in this comrade. She wondered how we can work to overcome repression within CUAD.
On the topic of state repression and the Odinga essay, one comrade noted his reflection that the Panther 21 trial seemed to be more about getting them off the street and bankrupting them, rather than any real belief in a transgression. This reflection is further evidence that the circus of legal battles and imprisonment largely aims to destroy liberation movements and quell the people's conquest for power. This comrade called into question the idea of “abolition,” while living in a class society. She pointed out that prisons function to perpetuate the domination of one class over another and that we cannot abolish prisons without abolishing class.
This comment prompted another comrade to criticize Angela Davis’ recent endorsement of Kamala Harris, pointing out the flagrant hypocrisy of the author of “are prisons obsolete?” endorsing the self-proclaimed “top cop.” We discussed the role of central leaders in various movements, with one comrade taking issue with what they called the “cult of personality” that follows certain leaders.
By contrast, one comrade disagreed with that terminology, saying that it’s often been used to fuel anticommunism, specifically being waged against Mao and Stalin, who accomplished great victories in China and Russia. Another comrade drew a comparison with the recently assassinated Hamas leader Ismail Haniyeh, saying that he, and others like him, deserve to be honored for his accomplishments in life and death.
We discussed what makes someone venerable vs vacuous as a front-facing leader. One comrade noted that a leader must reflect the people and not impose any individual will on them. Anyone who is front-facing must convey the sentiments of the collective. In agreement, one comrade mentioned her experience at Curbfest, where a former member of the Black Panther Party spoke. He said the best compliment you could give a Panther is that they serve the people. There was a resounding agreement that serving the people is essential for determining who are leaders worthy of honoring, and who are merely seeking personal fame or making the status quo more palatable. Another aspect of leadership is engaging in political education and study. One comrade pointed out the vast accounts we read of political prisoners using their time to study.
One comrade mentioned a book she read about mutual aid that argued against leaders, hierarchies, and structured organizations. In response, another comrade argued that leadership and structure are essential for the creation of a solid, long-term movement. As Bukhari reminds us in her book, "revolution is protracted"—it requires time, deliberate planning, and clear organization. Without strong leadership grounded in revolutionary theory, movements risk falling into chaos or losing momentum. We can see this in the Axis of Resistance, where Hamas, Hezbollah, Ansarallah, and others have effectively used hierarchy and structured organization led by an anti-imperialist political line to carry out operations effectively. Their ability to sustain their struggle over decades highlights the importance of correct politics, disciplined leadership, and strategic coordination.
Regarding organizational structure, one comrade brought up the tendency for organizations to be destroyed from the inside. He specifically referenced male chauvinism as a recurring issue. Mao reminds us that internal contradictions are primary, “In a suitable temperature an egg changes into a chicken, but no temperature can change a stone into a chicken, because each has a different basis.”
We can see this phenomenon play out in organizations, which are typically equipped to weather external contradictions, e.g., repression, but fall apart with internal fracturing. One comrade noted that the Cointelpro tactics exploited this fact by sowing rumors and doubt among members of various revolutionary organizations.
A few comrades suggested community care as a way to combat this internal fracturing, noting that we must care for our comrades to build trust and fortify our movement. Another comrade related this problem back to issues of political education, suggesting that we must develop our members to be principled so we can address these problems scientifically as they arise. We noted that because we live in an imperialist society, many of us have reactionary vestiges that we’re still working to overcome. Establishing a principled organization built on camaraderie will help us be resilient and able to address issues of misogyny and racism from the basis that we are united on a shared struggle, which in our movement is Palestinian liberation.
One comrade mentioned the process of unity-struggle-unity, through which we achieve higher levels of unity through struggle. If a comrade expresses misogynistic tendencies, we should be intrepid in our struggle to raise this comrade to a higher level of unity by struggling against backwards ideas. This process will leave no room for building resentment because issues will be addressed in a scientific and principled manner. In turn, this will make our organization stronger and work through internal disunity.
Another way to increase the strength of an organization is to unite broadly. As one comrade pointed out, uniting broadly does not mean diluting our politics or messaging. Rather, it means viewing issues dialectically and incorporating people into the struggle at whatever point they seem ready to engage. One comrade recalled the faculty walk out last semester after the first encampment arrests. Some comrades were initially cynical, claiming students shouldn’t have to be mass arrested for faculty to care. While this comrade agreed with that sentiment, she maintained that we should welcome any engagement and meet people where they’re at. Similarly, another comrade noted that we can unite with the student masses who are becoming increasingly more disgruntled about the securitization of campus. While some might think it’s less than ideal that a student would be more concerned about being inconvenienced on the way to class than about a genocide in Gaza, we cannot let this resentment keep us from being tactical. We discussed that we should try to agitate and mobilize these students to join our cause from the basis of cops off campus. Then, through our shared struggle, we can work to develop their political consciousness to understand the direct ties of security in campus, Columbia’s genocidal investments, and imperialism at large. One comrade phrased this as having “multiple on-ramps,” noting that we can give everyone a task and turn apathy into action.
READER SUBMISSION: BETWEEN AN OLIGARCHY AND A LUXURY GOODS BRAND
As we begin to organise for the new year, we should take the time to reflect on what it is we face, not just with Columbia University but in US politics in general. Only in recognising the reality of our situation beyond the rhetoric can we effectively unite against it.
Coming to the US, I have been immediately confronted with two of the great "pillars of democracy" in the free world: the Presidential election and the free and spirited inquiry of university. In both cases I and my fellow international students have been subjected to what feels like an endless stream of liberal consciousness. The need to dialogue, discuss, disagree, accept, tolerate and for God's sake vote Kamala seems to lurk in every sidechat post, not to mention the six whole speeches given to me in orientation on that exact topic. What this article aims to do is to confront the reality of these institutions behind the mask of democracy. And for all their dissimilarities, they are very much united by the fact that they have something to hide.
Let's start with the US elections. On the face of it, Trump and Kamala could hardly look more apart. It is symbolically striking, and dare I say empowering, to see an open racist debate a woman of colour on the world stage. Moreover, I don't think it's accurate to say "they're all the same" and be done with it. Rhetoric has an effect, one only needs to look at the recent pogroms in the UK or the events of January 6th to see that. But when we talk about the impact of establishment politics in the “democratic” countries of the world, we can fall into the trap of thinking that just because politicians respond to voters in their rhetoric means that this translates into meaningful policy change. Some voters' preferences do indeed matter, the trouble is that for both parties it tends to be the same ones.
In the modestly titled “Testing Theories of American Politics: Elites, Interest Groups, and Average Citizens.” Gillens and Page showed just that, finding that when majority preferences clash with the preferences of the wealthiest top 10%, the latter almost always win out. The same goes for interest groups, with mass based groups being both far fewer in number and far less likely to have their preferences met than their elite counterparts. For many of us, the findings shouldn’t be surprising, and while other papers written since may show that middle class preferences often align with elite interests, all show that the preferences of the bottom half of the country have little effect on policy. Political Scientists may defend the form of democracy we have, claiming that the fact that the vast majority of US citizens want public healthcare, legalised abortion, and rent control does not mean that our elected officials should have to listen. Yet this form of policymaking, guided forward by our neoliberal betters, is a far cry from the democracy put forward by our electoral spectacle.
The spectacle of Columbia, though different, plays a similar role. From the very first day we are met with endless speeches exalting dialogue, free-inquiry, respect and tolerance for the opinions of others. But beyond the spectacle of students debating their opinions, who really holds the power to make change? It is clearly not the students themselves, who have voted overwhelmingly for divestment in both Columbia College and Barnard on multiple occasions. It is not our student council, who voted to boycott companies supporting Israel’s campaign of genocide and apartheid. And it is not our professors, many of whom oppose both the genocide of Palestinians and the repression of students and professors by Columbia University. Decision making in Columbia is not made from the bottom up, but the top down. The call for debate is thus a call to maintain the illusion that our voices matter when they simply don’t, and never will until this university accepts genuine student decision making.
Without their empty platitudes, these institutions remain powerful. But they also become everything that they claim to despise. Just another oligarchy, enforcing the interests of an elite over the suffering of an unheard populous. And just another luxury good manufacturer, creating scarcity in order to maintain the prestige of its highly sought after products. These facts may be obvious to those who are reading the Barricade. But they will not be for many students. If we are to force this institution to divest, we must build a student body that recognises this institution beyond the illusion. What we have seen so far is heartening in this, with many non-engaged people rallying against the repression of their classmates. But we need this recognition of reality to follow through to the new year.
We need a movement that highlights the contradictions of those we are fighting against. We need a movement that puts the values of the majority of students on a collision course with an institution that cannot fulfil its own claims to democracy. And we need this movement now, for those who do not move will never know the weight of their chains.
A READER’S RESPONSE TO REPORTING ON THE RESISTANCE AS PROGRESSIVE
by Abu Essiya
Fouzi Slisli has an article in Critique describing “The Elephant in Fanon’s The Wretched of the Earth.” In it, he describes how Fanon effectively omits the Islamic anti-colonial tradition in his analysis of the Algerian Revolution (1954-1962). He explains that “if Fanon cites that tradition everywhere, he does not reference it anywhere. He explains the acts of resistance and applauds the culture of Algerian peasants, but he does not name them for what they were—the tradition of Islamic resistance to colonialism.”
Slisli cites in this regard the centrality of a long tradition of Islamic anti-colonialism to Algerian independence: the jihad of scholar-warriors like Emir Abdelkader and Sheikh Mohamed El-Mokrani in the 19th century, the role of Sufi orders (zawāya), mosques, and Islamic schools (madāris) in organizing the peasant class, and the instrumental role of the Association of Algerian Muslim Scholars (Jam`iyyat al-`Ulamā’ al-muslimīn al-jazā’iriyyīn) of Sheikh Ibn Badis of the 20th century. Even during the Revolution, it is little known in the West that prominent leaders of the National Liberation Front (FLN) such as Larbi Ben Mhidi and Zhour Ounissi were themselves students of the madāris (Islamic schools) of Ibn Badis’ Association of Algerian Muslim Scholars.
An earlier edition of the Barricade included a “Reader Response: Reporting on the Resistance as Progressive.” The response by editors of the Barricade was much needed. In it, they push back on the idea that the vanguard of today’s Palestinian resistance, namely Hamas and Ansarallah, are “not progressive”. They explain that Hamas and Ansarallah are principally progressive forces in an anti-imperialist struggle because of their military accomplishments and popularity among the vast majority of Palestinians.
However, write the editors, “Assessing Hamas and Ansarallah as principally progressive forces in an anti-imperialist struggle does not mean that one has to agree with every aspect of the nature of these forces, or that they have always been or always will be principally progressive. These other aspects are secondary to the issue at hand, which is their role in carrying out a national liberation war against their oppressors.”
The Barricade editors are correct to point out that in the context of a brutal genocide the primary metric for assessing resistance is not necessarily ideological (or what they call ‘secondary issues’) but rather, that the direct opposition to imperialism, as well as mass-popular support, carry much more primacy.
If we go further in our analysis however, we may suspect, in the initial letter to the Barricade, a certain specter hiding behind the assertion that Hamas and Ansarallah are not progressive forces. The suspicion here is, I believe, towards the specter of Islam as, it is presumed, a particularly reactionary force that contradicts the revolutionary aspirations of anti-imperialist and anti-capitalist struggle. That is, it is not just that are Hamas and Ansarallah are not progressive forces. It is their Islamic aspects, and thus the Islamic aspects of the resistance, that are deemed problematic.
My point here is not to delve into the particular histories, ideologies, and politics of Hamas and Ansarallah, nor is it to try and disprove this statement in its particularity. It is, however, to challenge what I think is a creeping assumption, as old as Orientalism itself, that the Islamic aspect of such groups, and Islam more broadly, are particularly problematic. Various scholars have articulated this critique of Western Orientalist representations of Muslims, and I hardly think it needs belaboring. One need only look at Columbia’s own dissident intellectuals and their works, Edward Said’s Orientalism or Lila Abu Lughod’s Do Muslim Women Need Saving?, to find some of its finest articulators. The problem these authors gesture to is how Western liberal discourses construct an “Orient” that is Europe’s other and antithesis: backwards and oppressive to women. In progressive analyses of anti-imperialist struggles, such Orientalist views emerge as well, often in the form of dismissing Islam as a reactionary ideology that impedes revolutionary struggle or, perhaps more sympathetically, by omitting reference to the Islamic aspect of anti-imperialist resistance all together.
As a corrective to this tendency, we may instead turn our attention to the Islamic basis, spirit and elan that undergirds so many facets of the contemporary Palestinian resistance. As we have seen repeatedly since the beginning of the uprising, the resistance has articulated in no unclear terms the sharī`a basis for their profound respect for the ethics of war, demonstrated in their humane treatment of prisoners (especially women prisoners). They have demonstrated how a central theological commitment in Islam, namely to reject all forms of servitude and subordination to anyone or anything other than God, necessitates the moral imperative to resist in the context of violent domination and oppression.
In situations of extreme tribulation and unfathomable violence, they have demonstrated a deep understanding of the beautifully intricate notion of qadr, at once a profound metaphysical contentment with the divine will, as well as a liberating moral duty to struggle against injustice and tyranny. In the course of their resistance, they embody a radical de-centering of the self in their turning to prayer and reliance upon God. Such practices are not incidental to the resistance, but instead constitute its central component.
For so many Muslim anti-imperialists, not only is Islam not a problem, but it offers in its ethically rooted and counter-hegemonic traditions, a potent critique of the horror-scape that has been produced by late-liberal capitalist/colonial modernity: of environmental superexploitation, insatiable capitalist predation, neoliberal forms of governmentality, alienation, surveillance and repression, displacement and forced migration, forever wars, neofascistic death cults like Zionism, and in liberal modernity’s ultimate form, the practice of genocide, or total death of the Other.
For so many within this tradition of Islamic anti-imperialism, and the Islamic tradition in general, Islam is not an a priori unsavory or inconvenient hurdle in liberatory struggle, but rather, its foundational principles, discourses, and objectives are rooted in a liberatory ethic. For others, the Islamic tradition offers an epistemic challenge and critique of the Modern, Western Liberal tradition and its colonially imposed hegemony. It is understood as proposing different ontological premises, spirituo-ethical frameworks, temporal resonances, and worldly and otherworldly objectives. That is, in the Islamic tradition is the stuff for imagining an Other life-world all together, its telos being not just worldly liberation (although that is certainly a moral obligation), but just as importantly, a metaphysical reorientation and elevation to the divine.
The essence of this reordering is perhaps best captured in the succinct words of the emissary of the Prophet Muhammad, Rab`ī bin `Āmir, when he was sent to the court of the Persian Empire, and said:
Allah has sent us to deliver those who will, from the worship of the creation to the worship of the Creator of creation, from the constriction of this world to that which is infinitely vaster, from the tyranny and injustice of other paths, to the balanced justice [found] in submission to Allah.
This is reflected in the common refrain heard among the valiant Palestinian people. Confronted with the greatest military and political forces of our day, of Israeli massacres, U.S. manufactured bunker bombs, and global political collusion, they say:
Hasbuna Allah wa ni`ma al-wakīl!
Allah is sufficient for us, and the best protector!
There is not space here to delve into the details of this broadly outlined tradition among Muslim anti-imperialists, nor is there room for an in-depth analysis of the diverse resistance factions, and their particular discursive frameworks. Needless to say, the Palestinian resistance, like all anti-colonial movements, draws from a broad and rich set of anti-imperialist traditions. And as the Palestinian resistance itself has emphasized, the resistance is diverse and united across ideological difference; the purpose here is not to gesture towards divisiveness.
My goal, instead, is to point out that:
A) there is an elephant in the room when discussing the Palestinian resistance, namely that the Islamic basis of the resistance is often omitted or otherwise portrayed as a contradiction of progressive anti-imperialist struggle, and
B) these portrayals are troubling if solidarity with the resistance is to be taken seriously. While the idea that Islam and the Islamic tradition are inherently problematic is more clearly wrong-headed, its omission or relegation in analysis of anti-imperialist struggles reflects what I believe amounts to a poverty of political imagination.
Instead, as many Muslim anti-imperialists have long been demonstrating, and contrary to the racist, Islamophobic, Orientalist and imperialist propaganda that abounds: there is much to be gained from recognizing and learning from the Islamic anti-imperialist tradition. Much like Muslim revolutionaries in Algeria before them and across the Global South, from Indonesia to Senegal (and even right here in Harlem under the leadership of a certain El-Hajj Malek El-Shabazz), the heroic Palestinian resistance and the Palestinian people have demonstrated that much of their resistance today draws its lifeblood from a distinctly Islamic anti-colonial tradition. More than simply not being a problem, in this tradition might just be the much-needed inspiration for our time, “for those who would reflect”.
DIVEST AND BOYCOTT THE GENOCIDAL APARTHEID STATE OF SO-CALLED ISRAEL
GRANT COMPLETE AMNESTY TO STUDENT PROTESTORS
LONG LIVE THE STUDENT INTIFADA
LONG LIVE THE PALESTINIAN NATIONAL RESISTANCE
FREE PALESTINE FROM THE RIVER TO THE SEA WITHIN OUR LIFETIME
GLORY TO ALL OUR MARTYRS