He also explicitly says that he's not going into the history of the region. He says that he won't talk about the holocaust or the nakba or how Palestinians became displaced in Gaza and the west bank. I think this would have been important information for american liberals. He tells the audience to google it.
fwiw, I have had a couple people in my life who know absolutely nothing about Palestine ask me what was going on, because they know I care about it. I also know with them, if went into the history of it all first I would probably lose their interest and/or they would have a hard time tracking it all. So in order to keep it very basic, I just started with the notion about how the Palestinians have no say in how their lives are run and how what they live under is the textbook definition of apartheid. That was enough to convince them that Zionism is bad. That’s how awful just the current situation is for the Palestinians - that even without the historical context, it is so incredibly brutal and unjust that no person with an ounce of humanity can support Israel. I don’t know if that’s what Oliver was going for or not.
He also talks about a bag that was removed from amazon because it said "Merry Ham-mas!", just like some shitty Christmas merchandise that was supposed to pair the words "Ham" and "Christmas", people confused it with Hamas.
Yeah, I've noticed a lot of libs and centrists who have every instinct to "both sides" it, but just can't manage to because the occupation is so violent and so indiscriminate. They easily agree w a ceasefire now. To them, I think a ceasefire is just the fastest way to get the carnage off their screens and go back to not thinking about the middle east.
I've also noticed a lot of people on the right who would normally love bombing brown people, but also can't quite get on board so they're now the ones giving up, mumbling something about "both sides" and awkwardly changing the subject. It's kind of strange seeing people who are normally maniacs behave so cautiously. They know its indefensible and just don't want to be associated with it.
fwiw, I have had a couple people in my life who know absolutely nothing about Palestine ask me what was going on, because they know I care about it. I also know with them, if went into the history of it all first I would probably lose their interest and/or they would have a hard time tracking it all. So in order to keep it very basic, I just started with the notion about how the Palestinians have no say in how their lives are run and how what they live under is the textbook definition of apartheid. That was enough to convince them that Zionism is bad. That’s how awful just the current situation is for the Palestinians - that even without the historical context, it is so incredibly brutal and unjust that no person with an ounce of humanity can support Israel. I don’t know if that’s what Oliver was going for or not.
Yeah, I've noticed a lot of libs and centrists who have every instinct to "both sides" it, but just can't manage to because the occupation is so violent and so indiscriminate. They easily agree w a ceasefire now. To them, I think a ceasefire is just the fastest way to get the carnage off their screens and go back to not thinking about the middle east.
I've also noticed a lot of people on the right who would normally love bombing brown people, but also can't quite get on board so they're now the ones giving up, mumbling something about "both sides" and awkwardly changing the subject. It's kind of strange seeing people who are normally maniacs behave so cautiously. They know its indefensible and just don't want to be associated with it.