this post was submitted on 10 Feb 2026
106 points (99.1% liked)
memes
23668 readers
185 users here now
dank memes
Rules:
-
All posts must be memes and follow a general meme setup.
-
No unedited webcomics.
-
Someone saying something funny or cringe on twitter/tumblr/reddit/etc. is not a meme. Post that stuff in /c/slop
-
Va*sh posting is haram and will be removed.
-
Follow the code of conduct.
-
Tag OC at the end of your title and we'll probably pin it for a while if we see it.
-
Recent reposts might be removed.
-
No anti-natalism memes. See: Eco-fascism Primer
founded 5 years ago
MODERATORS
you are viewing a single comment's thread
view the rest of the comments
view the rest of the comments
Yes. He has explained his reasoning as being based on upholding international law insofar as it holds Israel accountable for its crimes but also with the right that it grants Israel to exist. He then criticizes BDS for having their cake and eating it too, since some leaders in BDS have said that they don't want Israel to exist anymore, while BDS generally upholds international law to justify their criticism of Israel.
AFAIK his criticism of BDS wasn't that they rejected Israel per se, but rather that they upheld one aspect of international law but not the other. I disagree because I think international law is already largely worthless, but I think it was "if you lean on the law that says X, you have to accept that the same law says Y", rather than "Israel has a right to exist and I don't like that you're undermining it". I could be misremembering this, though.
Yeah that's exactly what I mean, but the sticking point is that applying his rule means anyone who says "Israel should stop existing and Palestine should be the only state in that territory" is out of line. Sure, it's because of his respect for international law (which is what makes his work as an academic rock solid) but it's still a rule that is incompatible with the realities of imperialism.
I think his point is that it's out of line if the same person also calls for respect of international law, because that's an inconsistent position (international law supports Israel's right to exist, so calling to respect it means also calling for that). As I said before, I think international law is already worthless, but I see the logic of the argument even if I disagree with it. I might have been misremembering his position, though.
He's also talked about making several mistakes, I wonder if he ranks that as one of them
Where has he talked about this? I’m curious how much accountability he’s taken
He alluded to it on TrueAnon like 3 years ago. Basically lamenting he lost faith in the Palestinian cause for a while, feeling like people could not be made to care about their brutalization, and regretted advocating for nonviolence because the March of Return was a failure. I can't recall if he mentioned BDS. I don't have sources.
I don't know how much accountability he has taken. I have a lot of respect for Finkelstein, but the man does have serious blind spots.
Yes he gave up on Palestine after the great march of return, I was wondering if there was any other reflection. Thank you!