Student protests: Principled stances vs political realism

While recognising the commendable moral stances of student protestors advocating for Palestinian rights, one should still be able to critique them

Student protests: Principled stances vs political realism

Separating the moral of any given issue from politics is neither simple nor straightforward. Those who try often fail, and those who prioritise one over the other often fail on both fronts. The truth is that ethics and politics are deeply intertwined.

No group should be above criticism, even those who are well-intentioned. For example, while recognising the commendable moral stances of student protestors advocating for Palestinian rights, one should still be able to critique them.

The growing student protests across America—which have resulted in hundreds of arrests nationwide and jeopardise the future of thousands of students—are reflective of the growing national sentiment (now in the majority), which objects to unequivocal support for Israel. The Biden administration's response has been to violently crack down on the protests—not to make US support for Israel conditional.

This "iron-clad" support will likely hurt Biden in the polls come November when young voters and Arab Americans increasingly say they will not vote for him. This means that despite former US President Donald Trump's multiple court cases and inflammatory rhetoric, he could very well return to the White House after Biden's four-year stint.

These students—whether intentionally or not—could be inadvertently aiding Trump, the president who recognised Israel's illegal annexation of the Occupied Syrian Golan Heights and moved the US embassy to Jerusalem during his time in office.

On the other hand, you have Biden, who, in the 1980s, when he was a senator, famously said that the $3bn dollars a year to Israel is "the best investment America has ever made. If Israel didn’t exist, America would have to invent an Israel to protect its interest in the region."

Whether voters like it or not, Biden and Trump are the two candidates they must choose from in the upcoming elections. While they don't like Biden's backing of Israel in Gaza, Trump will not likely be any better on the issue. Both candidates will support Israel.

There is a worrying convergence in views from "resistance" figures, post-colonialists, the new and old left, and adherents of political Islam.

Some observers argue that regardless of who is in office, students should continue to pressure their elected officials on issues that matter to them—specifically, their opposition to the atrocities in Palestine that their tax dollars are paying for. Others believe US policy on Israel will not shift and that the student protest movement won't produce change.

However, these protests cannot be analysed from a purely moral lens. Politics will always be a factor. To centre the issue on principles alone is wrong as it fails to take into account complex and converging factors.

There are many examples throughout history of well-intentioned actions exploited by sinister forces. Those who belong to the post-colonial school of thought often overlook the realpolitik forces that shape global dynamics and believe they can win using logical arguments alone. Unfortunately, this way of thinking demonstrates a naive and outdated worldview that is increasingly detached from reality.

There is a worrying convergence in views from "resistance" figures, post-colonialists, the new and old left, and adherents of political Islam. To believe that these different forces are all driven by moral considerations is naive. It is important to question how all these groups suddenly aligned with the ideology of their foes.

By making this argument, I am not trying to discourage students from demonstrating or saying they should not speak out against the violence being inflicted on the Palestinian people. But advocating against the harm being inflicted on the children of Gaza is not as simple as donning a Palestinian keffiyeh or throwing up peace signs.

This disconnect is often overlooked in public debates on the topic, which allows some to push their agenda and dangle the promise of imminent victory without considering the political implications of their positions.

font change