,
9 tweets,
3 min read
Read on Twitter
1. This is an interesting response to my being in Israel with @philosproject. A few thoughts to follow, since I think it gets at an important divide. First, Philos isn't a "Christian Zionist" organization. Its principles are discussed at some length here: philosproject.org/about/#faq-abo…
2. The trip I'm part of is *not* about the conflict. It's explicitly about religion & nationalism in Israel. My research focuses on religion in public life. That's exactly what @philosproject focuses on. Israel is a pretty important case study when it comes to religion & politics
3. The notion that Arabs or Muslims (or people in general) should avoid studying or conducting research in or on one of the most important case studies on the intersection of religion, nationalism and (il)liberalism would be—to put it mildly—odd
4. To get a better understanding of religion in Israeli public life, presumably I'd travel with an org that has access to important thinkers on that even if those people are right-wing. In fact, I'd prefer them to be more right-wing since I generally focus on right-wing politics
5. I routinely participate in discussions where there are stark ideological divides. It's unclear why I would make Israel or Israelis an exception. In my research, I've spent hundreds of hours engaging with Muslim Brotherhood members, however much I disagree with them personally
6. This principle should also be applied to activists in European far-right parties: to understand them in their own words and on their own terms. Many of these groups are quite anti-Muslim. I'm Muslim. That makes engaging with them *more* compelling from a research standpoint
7. Also, the idea of not traveling to Israel or talking to real-life Israelis in Israel is, well, kind of bizarre. Why ordinary Israelis—many of whom oppose the occupation—would be penalized for the actions of their government is a practical question but also a moral one
8. Some people will disagree with me, and there will be no way to undo that disagreement. My critics prioritize other moral-practical considerations, and I respect that. I have my own starting premises that I try to hold to (which revolve around agonism and democratic minimalism)
9. Its moral attraction aside, agonism can be liberating (especially on Twitter) because it removes agreement or consensus as explicit goals of political engagement. I discuss some of the principles of agonism and how they apply to everyday politics here: americanaffairsjournal.org/2018/11/left-p…
