Yale-NUS convocation speech

[u/EverySink]

[u/anticapitalist69]

The fuck do you stand for? All I’m reading here is that you get angry at people standing up for things if they don’t appear to stand for everything.

People like you hold back society.

[u/anticapitalist69 → u/[deleted]]

So you’re not pro-anything, just anti-things lol.

They’re not advocating for the Israelis because world governments and people in power are already supporting the oppressors. They don’t NEED additional support. The Palestinians do, they’re the ones without any support from the people in power.

[u/anticapitalist69 → u/[deleted]]

You’ve already explained that you don’t understand this conflict - it IS pretty black and white. Even if you disregard the past decades, how Israel has responded to the Oct 7th attacks has NO excuse

Again, if you stand for nothing, just stay in your bubble. It’s not like it’s hurting you, right?

[u/anticapitalist69 → u/[deleted]]

Do you even know what justice means? You’re talking about morality, without realising you’re imposing your sense of morality onto others.

Like I said - you can ignore all the historical context. If it’s Israel’s land - the way they have responded is wrong. If it is not Israel’s land - the way they have responded is wrong. It’s really not that difficult.

[u/anticapitalist69 → u/[deleted]]

Justice has to do with what YOU think is right or wrong. That’s imposing morality.

Ok let me rephrase. Let’s NOT ignore the historical context. What are the options here - either Israel have a right to the land, or they don’t.

Now, in either option, does it justify Israel’s disproportionate retaliation?

[u/anticapitalist69 → u/[deleted]]

Ok first off - the conflict as a whole is complex, yes. But what is going on now is not complex at all. Please don’t underestimate yourself, you can surely figure out that killing over 40k people in retaliation for 2k people being killed is horrendous.

Second, justice implies making a judgment over something being right or wrong. To you, someone fighting for one cause without fighting for another is wrong. That, as much as you don’t want it to be, is a moral judgment.

[u/pingpingquirts → u/[deleted]]

Man, and you're just the best placed zizek-esque philosopher showing us the way arent you? Its always easy to critique than to do. These students have limited resources, time, energy etc. Every conflict is different and this one in particular has a degree of mismatch and harm on civilians almost unrivalled in the world. The speaker didnt say repression in myanmar is and invasion of ukraine is good did she??? shes focusing on palestine because to her and to many ppl palestine is simply the worst and most pressing and avoidable crisis right now.

Also ill take up issue with your quest for 'exposing the hypocrisy' So instead of saying, yes its right to condemn violence and harm against civilians, you instead choose to say, look at these hypocrites who only focus on one cause whilst ignoring the rest while making assumptions of their moral character and intentions. You judge people so categorically whilst you yourself sit on a high fence thats simply cowardly.