Skip to main content

The Palestine question for these times: Leadership, social justice and viewpoint neutrality

Figure 1: The Nakba that forms the infrastructure of Israeli settler colonialism
 

I was recently approached for a leadership opportunity. 

The person (Let's call them Sam) that approached me for the role stated in great depth how much they valued my commitments to social justice, de-westernizing knowledge systems, and building spaces for the Global South. The position was crafted with the descriptors of social justice, decolonization, and building community that felt appealing. In his initial email, Sam noted that I was one of the top candidates for their group.

After some deliberation, I decided to explore the conversation to see where it would take me. 

Sam was convinced that this opportunity is a great fit for my career, and one I would find challenging in a meaningful way. They shared with me the various resources that would be available for building architectures, programmes, and pathways dedicated to social justice. 

By the third iteration of the conversation, I figured it's an appropriate time to get serious. 

The Palestine question

I asked Sam if they had researched my public scholarship, including my public commentaries on Palestine. 

I pointed them to my blog, my LinkedIn profile, and my X feed, asking if they had gone through these spaces where my voice engages with the Palestine question.

Sam seemed prepared for the question. 

He had done his research and indicated having a robust sense of my digital footprint.

He shared with confidence that he was well aware of my public commentaries, and this was indeed one of the reasons why they were reaching out to me. For this position, it seemed, my public (including digital) footprint was a draw.

Tweeting on Palestine while being a leader

I then asked, what norms there would be about my ongoing public commentary if I were to be successful with the recruitment? 

I asked him if the leadership role would require me to stop tweeting on Palestine and stop writing my blog pieces naming Israeli settler colonialism, Zionist repression of free speech and academic freedom, and genocide. 

Sam responded, he would talk to the wider leadership and get back to me.

We set aside a time for a follow-up conversation.

The texture of the follow-up conversation reiterated the optimism Sam had initially demonstrated. He stated his belief that I could find a way to manage my public scholarship and my leadership role as long as I separated the two.

Separating leadership from the Palestine question and viewpoint neutrality

Sam noted that as a leader in a senior role, I would be expected to lead for all stakeholders, and this included those that didn't agree with my views on Palestine. 

He further noted that leadership is expected to exercise viewpoint neutrality, referring to the notion that institutions take neutral positions on critical issues of the times. 

Institutions, and institutional leadership, are expected not to demonstrate their orientation toward a particular position. 

Further, the Palestine question is a polarizing one and an institutional leader is expected to rise above the commitments to a particular position on the question.

Viewpoint neutrality is not justice

The conversation with Sam elucidates so much the state of the academe. 

Let me begin this section by noting that I commend Sam and the organization he represented for their commitment to justice, especially at a time where the very naming of justice has been forbidden by the political mainstreaming of white supremacy and Zionism across Western democracies.

However, the language of stakeholder management, setting up the expectation that a university leader responds to all stakeholders, across all sides, promotes the sort of both side-ism (or shall we say, all side-ism) that is antithetical to justice. 

Justice by its nature is not neutral. And the Palestine question is the litmus test for calls to social justice. 

The concept of social justice calls upon us to take sides, to stand with those being oppressed by the machineries of power. Calls to social justice place upon us the responsibility of taking sides, holding us accountable to those experiencing the sheer force of injustice. This is especially true for leaders across the academe who hold significant institutional and societal power.

Calls to social justice place upon us the moral responsibility of naming the forces of settler colonialism, imperialism and racial capitalism that are carrying out the worst excesses of violence. 

Calls to social justice implore us to act intellectually, politically, and materially amidst the unfolding of a genocide, naming the genocide, knowing fully well that powerful Zionist forces are organized precisely to pathologize the acts of naming the genocide. 

Timing is key here; the urgency for speaking out and standing up is now, not after Palestinians have been expelled by the violent forces of Israeli occupation.

The Palestine question reveals real-time the workings of settler colonialism, imperialism, and racial capitalism. Any claims of a commitment to social justice therefore, at this juncture, must first-and-foremost be evaluated through the framework of the Palestine question. 

For academic leaders who evince a commitment to social justice, the question must be asked: What is/was your position on the Palestine question? Are you/Did you making/make this position public? How are you acting/did you act as an academic leader with power on the Palestine question? 

Have you advocated to divest your institution from the Israeli occupation?

Viewpoint neutrality within this context is a managerial coverup for standing by as deep injustice unfolds in the form of a genocide. It's an easy alibi. You can't be viewpoint neutral in the middle of a genocide.

In 2025, amidst the ongoing genocide being carried out by Israel in Gaza and the forced starvation of Palestinians, viewpoint neutrality is the fundamental antithesis of a moral commitment to justice.

Popular posts from this blog

The whiteness of binaries that erase the Global South: On Communicative Inversions and the invitation to Vijay Prashad in Aotearoa

When I learned through my activist networks that the public intellectual Vijay Prashad was coming to Aotearoa, I was filled with joy. In my early years in the U.S., when learning the basics of the struggle against the fascist forces of Hindutva, I came in conversation with Vijay's work. Two of his critical interventions, the book, The Karma of Brown Folk , and the journal article " The protean forms of Yankee Hindutva " co-authored with Biju Matthew and published in Ethnic and Racial Studies shaped my early activism. These pieces of work are core readings in understanding the workings of Hindutva fascism and how it mobilizes cultural tropes to serve fascist agendas. Much later, I felt overjoyed learning about his West Bengal roots and his actual commitment to the politics of the Left, reflected in the organising of the Communist Party of India (Marxist), a political register that shaped much of my earliest lessons around Global South resistance, collectivization, and orga...
Read more

Whiteness, NCA, and Distinguished Scholars

In a post made in response to the changes to how my discipline operates made by the Executive Committee of the largest organization of the discipline, the National Communication Association (NCA), one of the editors of a disciplinary journal Rhetoric and Public Affairs (RPA), Professor Martin J. Medhurst, a Distinguished Scholar of the discipline, calls out what he sees as the threat of identity (see below for his full piece published in the journal that he has edited for 20+ years, with 2019 SJR score of 0.27). In what he notes is a threat to the "scholarly merit" of the discipline, Professor Medhurst sets up a caricature of what he calls "identity." In his rhetorical construction of the struggles the NCA has faced over the years to find Distinguished Scholars of colour, he shares with us the facts. So let's look at the facts presented by this rhetor. It turns out, as a member of the Distinguished Scholar community of the NCA, Mr. Medhurst has problems wit...
Read more

Upper caste Indian women in the diaspora, DEI, and the politics of hate

Figure 1: Trump, Vance and their partners responding to the remarks by Mariann Edgar Budde   Emergent from the struggles of the civil rights movement , led by African Americans , organized against the oppressive history of settler colonialism and slavery that forms the backbone of US society, structures around diversity, equity, and inclusion (DEI) formed an integral role in forging spaces for diverse recognition and representation.  These struggles around affirmative action, diversity, equity and inclusion were at the heart of the changes to white only immigration policies, building pathways for migration of diverse peoples from the Global South.  The changes to the immigration policies created opportunities for Indians to migrate to the US, with a rise of Indian immigration into the US since the 1970s into educational institutions, research and development infrastructures, and technology-finance infrastructures. These migratory structures into the US were leveraged by l...
Read more