The Miscellany News

On Friday, April 25 at 6 p.m., over 130 people packed tightly into Taylor 101 in anticipation of Norman Finkelstein’s lecture, “The Gaza Genocide and Freedom of Speech.” Finkelstein is a renowned political scientist, historian and author, known best for his staunchly pro-Palestinian books and opinions. He has become controversial over his career for pushing rhetoric that challenges the State of Israel and the political power it holds over Palestine. The lecture hall—which held a mix of students, administrators, faculty and Poughkeepsie community members—buzzed with eagerness and excitement to hear the speech. After a long wait, the audience fell silent as Finkelstein walked down the aisle to take the stage and begin to speak. 

Finkelstein began his lecture with a brief overview of the history of the Gaza Strip. He argued that, since 1948, Gaza has been relegated to the conditions of a concentration camp, and one that has only gotten worse since Israel’s blockade in 2006 in response to Hamas winning the Palestinian Legislative Elections in Gaza. Finkelstein explained, “Hamas won the elections, and at that point Israel, then the U.S., and then the E.U. imposed this economic blockade of Gaza, which has been described by Human Rights Watch, by certain UN commissions that visited Gaza; it’s been described as a crime against humanity.” He expanded: “Israel literally determined everything that went in, everything that went out, who went in and who went out, and at certain points, it actually put the people of Gaza on what they call a ‘humanitarian minimum,’ or a ‘starvation plus’ diet, where they calculate the calories of each person living in Gaza and adjusted the amount of food that went in.” Finkelstein claimed that Israel took on this action in order to ensure that Gaza would remain on the “precipice of an economic disaster.” 

Finkelstein also noted the numerous ways that peace has been denied to those living in Gaza since the 2006 blockade. He expressed his belief that there have been no changes in Israeli military policy despite what Finkelstein views as Hamas’ largely ignored attempts at diplomatic resolution and the UN’s findings in the Goldstone Report that Israel has acted in violation of international law. He also spoke of widespread non-violent civil resistance movements taken by Gazans and endorsed by Hamas, such as The Great March of Return in March 2018, in which Palestinians marched and organized peacefully around the border between Gaza and Israel, and Israeli soldiers responded by firing live ammunition, tear gas and rubber bullets. Two hundred fourteen Palestinians, including 46 children, were killed by this Israeli fire, and there were an additional 36,100 injuries from Israel’s response to the Great March of Return. Finkelstein presented all of this evidence to argue that every other avenue short of armed resistance had been tried by Gazans prior to Oct. 7. He concluded, “In my view, the people of Gaza had no real options on the eve of Oct. 7, except to acquiesce in their birth, life and death in the concentration camp.” 

The Miscellany News reached out to Vassar Professor of History Joshua Schreier for his perspective on the history of the Gaza Strip, and whether Palestinians’ armed resistance should be considered justified. Like Finkelstein, Schreier asserted the importance of considering the full history from both sides before coming to a conclusion. He said: “Do Palestinians have the right to resist? Absolutely, they have the right to resist. Does that mean anything is available to them, to those who have been oppressed? No, I don’t think that just because one suffers is necessarily a reason or justification to do anything.” He went on to say, “I think it makes more sense to interrogate the conditions that have led to the horrors of the last war, including the Oct. 7 attacks. We have to understand it in a much longer historical time frame. I think our interrogation has to be of, ‘What are the conditions of violence that breed violence?,’ rather than kind of having these almost intellectual debates about, ‘Was it justified, was it not justified?’ It’s certain it was, at some level, predictable.” 

Considering the role of the United States in funding Israel’s military, Finkelstein also spoke extensively about his belief in the importance of anti-Israel activism in the United States, conveying to his audience the necessity of protesting the U.S. government’s relationship with Israel. Finkelstein said, “Never believe that if you decide to do nothing, everything will just go on as it is. That’s not true. If you do nothing, it gets worse.” His words placed an imperative on the student population not to back down fighting for the Palestinian cause, even though the results may at times feel hopeless. Finkelstein addressed this directly: “Confucius persisted in his path, in the full knowledge that it was hopeless. What does that mean? Even if you know something is hopeless, there’s something inside of you that can not accept doing nothing. In other words, if you’re really, for lack of a better word, a moral person, you don’t do or not do on the basis of results. You do it because it’s the right thing to do.” Finkelstein’s point about pushing forward protest regardless of the results deeply resonated with the audience, which, in response, erupted in applause.

When asked about Finkelstein’s message about student protests, Noah Daube-Valois ’28 said, “I think Finkelstein’s message about protesting regardless of the effect it may have, was extremely powerful.” They continued, ”I think encouraging college students to protest [while] not being worried about how little effect it will have is a strong message to share with Vassar.”