
UK
Novelist Zadie Smith bothsidesed Gaza's genocide in a New Yorker essay, equating pro-Palestine chants to "weapons of mass destruction" and centering Jewish student "safety" over Palestinian slaughter. She has also opted for a 'conditional boycott' as opposed to committing to BDS.
Zadie Smith's August 2025 New Yorker piece on campus protests demands "nuance" that dilutes calls for justice, inverting ethics to shield Zionism; her August 7 letter with Hanif Kureishi and Brian Eno calls for boycott until Gaza aid flows, but ignores settler-colonial root.
Publishing
Zadie Smith, British novelist and essayist, has navigated the discourse on Israel's settler-colonial violence in Palestine with equivocal rhetoric that prioritizes performative nuance over unequivocal solidarity, thereby sustaining consent for the ongoing genocide in Gaza and the broader apartheid regime.
In her August 2025 New Yorker essay "Shibboleth: The Role of Words in the Campus Protests," Smith ostensibly supports U.S. student encampments demanding divestment and ceasefire amid Israel's assault on Gaza — which has slaughtered over 53,000 Palestinians since October 2023, with conservative estimates frozen due to journalist killings, aid obstructions, and mass graves indicating hundreds of thousands dead.
Yet Zadie Smith undermines this solidarity through bothsidesing, framing pro-Palestine language as "weapons of mass destruction" that endanger Jewish students more than the actual machinery of oppression: "For it may well be — within the ethical zone of interest that is a campus... that a Jewish student walking past the tents, who finds herself referred to as a Zionist, and then is warned to keep her distance, is, in that moment, the weakest participant in the zone."
This inversion weaponizes antisemitism accusations to equate hypothetical discomfort with the verifiable mass murder of 14,500 children in Gaza (at essay's writing), dismissing protesters' chants like "intifada" or "from the river to the sea" as exclusionary shibboleths while ignoring their invocation of resistance against 77 years of dispossession.
Smith's essay echoes atrocity propaganda by critiquing rigid binaries in discourse — "It is no doubt a great relief to say the word 'Hamas' as if it purely and solely described a terrorist entity... [or] 'Zionist colonialist state' and accept those three words as a full and unimpeachable definition" — yet applies this "nuance" selectively to sanitize Zionism, conflating "Jew" with "colonialist" only to decry it as abuse, without addressing how IHRA definitions conflate anti-Zionism with Jew-hatred to shield apartheid.
She acknowledges Israel's "monstrous and brutal mass murder" but subordinates it to calls for ethical flexibility: "Surely a ceasefire — as well as being an ethical necessity — is also in the immediate absolute interest of the hostages," erasing how hostage narratives justify collective punishment. Critiques, including Steve Salaita's analysis, highlight this as "sloppy and misinformed," tethering ambiguity to the status quo and rationalizing genocide by portraying protesters' words as the true threat, thus dehumanizing Palestinian advocates while normalizing Israel's erasure of Gaza's humanity.
In a purported walk-back, Smith signed an August 7, 2025, open letter organized by writers Horatio Clare and Sean Murray, joined by over 200 figures including Hanif Kureishi — veteran of a May 2025 letter denouncing Gaza as "genocidal" and calling for sanctions — and Brian Eno, who has long backed BDS, refused Israel performances, and hosted a September 2025 Wembley "Together for Palestine" concert likening Israel's actions to fascism.
The letter demands an "immediate and complete boycott of all forms of trade, exchange and business with the state of Israel" until UN-monitored aid reaches Gaza, alongside hostage releases, ending West Bank settler violence, and permanent ceasefire.
It states: "We make this call because the words and feelings of millions... have failed to bring about the feeding of the people of Gaza," regretting impacts on anti-Netanyahu Israelis but framing the boycott as individual sanction amid famine killing 197 from hunger alone.
Yet this solidarity is performative and conditional at its best, tolerating apartheid's foundational violence — Nakba expulsions, 57 years of siege — as long as aid trickles in, without addressing structural complicity.
Smith has not emulated BDS exemplars like Sally Rooney, who in 2021 refused Hebrew translations, prompting Israeli bookstores to pull her works, or the 2,700+ signatories of an October 2024 letter boycotting complicit Israeli publishers.
Through elite platforms like The New Yorker, Smith's rhetoric — demanding protesters "practice our ethics in the real world" while she enables the subjugation of Palestinians and smears of their allies as unethical, aligning with media whitewashing that freezes death tolls and buries Nakba legacies under "nuance."
fridaythings.com
🔒newyorker.com
🔒theguardian.com
🔒BDS Boycott:
The BDS (Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions) movement is a global campaign which follows the worldwide boycott movement that led to the successful dismantling of apartheid in South Africa and therefore advocates for various sustained forms of boycott against Israel until it complies with international law.
Founded as a response to the rampant, ongoing and systemic dispossession, displacement, and disenfranchisement endured by generations of Palestinians, the BDS movement is in direct response to the relentless expansion of Israeli settlements, the imposition of discriminatory laws and the denial of basic rights to millions living under occupation, apartheid or in exile with no right of return.
Central to the ethos of BDS is the belief that every purchase and action carries a weighty moral responsibility. To buy goods from or actively support companies or organizations on the BDS list is to cast a vote in favor of perpetuating injustice, a tacit endorsement of the status quo of occupation and discrimination. It’s a direct violation of the collective conscience, a betrayal of the fundamental principles of human rights and dignity.
By pressuring Israel and its supporters by withdrawing support and capital, humanity aims to bring awareness to — and ultimately — end the occupation of Palestine, grant equal rights to all Palestinians and recognize the right of Palestinian refugees to return to their homes. This pressure also extends to any individuals and entities found to be complicit in the normalization, funding or support of Israel’s brutal occupation and 75+ years of ethnic cleansing of Palestinians.
Dehumanization of Palestinians:
The systematic erasure of Palestinian history and culture is a well-documented effort that has been ongoing since the early 1900s. This erasure has taken many forms, including the destruction of physical records and infrastructure, the suppression of Palestinian voices and narratives, the appropriation of Palestinian cultural heritage and most visibly, the dehumanization of the Palestinian populace.
From the late 19th century to the mid-20th century, Palestinian records, literature, and cultural heritage faced deliberate and concerted efforts to obliterate their existence and narrative. This deliberate "archival silencing" has made reconstructing this period in Palestinian history incredibly challenging, yet the truths that remain paint a horrifying picture of the deliberate erasure and destruction of an entire population and its culture.
The dehumanization of Palestinians has been a deliberate policy, perpetuated through military operations, discriminatory laws, Israeli education and a pervasive culture that fosters prejudice. Dehumanising rhetoric, portraying Palestinians as "roaches" and "rats," lays the foundation for atrocities by stripping away their humanity in the eyes of the oppressor.
Widespread media narratives also project institutional biases ranging from depicting Palestinians solely as militants or desperate victims and erasing their normal daily life to embedding language biases around land, protests and resistance tactics. These patterns collectively indicate how public discourse within segments of Israeli society systematically dehumanize Palestinians while entrenching prejudices against them.
Falsely Equating 'Intifada' with Terrorism:
Despite the egregious lies and falsehoods perpetuated around the Intifada and its meaning, the reality is the Intifadas (shake-offs) represented grassroots Palestinian rebellion against decades of Israeli occupation characterized by nonviolent demonstrations and civil disobedience centered around boycotts, tax strikes, protests, and other measures focused against the occupation.
It was only after intense oppression from Israeli forces that resulted in the brutal massacre of approximately 1,100 innocent Palestinians (many of them women and children) that protestors adopted more violent tactics, still limiting themselves to throwing stones and molotov cocktails in the face of intense military aggression and force.
Similarly, 3,350 Palestinians would also later be slaughtered by Israelis during the second intifada, with tens of thousands more gravely injured - once again showing the violent and oppressive response innocent Palestinian civilians faced when protesting for their basic human rights and liberties.
Therefore, the malicious characterization of the Palestinian Intifadas as acts of "terrorism" and "genocide" represents an insidious attempt to delegitimize and demonize the struggle for Palestinian self-determination and liberation from Israeli occupation. This purposely inflammatory misrepresentation seeks to erase the historical roots of the Intifadas as grassroots uprisings and nonviolent civil resistance movements against decades of dehumanizing oppression.
By predominantly portraying the struggle for Palestinian liberation and statehood as inherently violent and affiliated with terrorism, Israeli propaganda and its supporters engage in a campaign of vicious historical omission and revisionism. They erase the fundamental reality that the Intifadas were born of decades of dehumanizing oppression, land theft, and ethnic persecution carried out against the Palestinian people by Israel's militarized occupying forces.
To equate these cries for emancipation with "terrorism" or “genocide” is a purposeful act of dehumanization that seeks to disparage and silence the Palestinian cause and render the victims of occupation and institutionalized racism as the aggressors, while sanctifying and absolving the state that has systematically stripped them of their homeland, rights and dignity through unrelenting violence, subjugation and displacement.
Distorting 'From the River to the Sea':
The purposeful distortion of the phrase "from the river to the sea" as a call for terrorism, genocide, and the expulsion of Jewish people constitutes a malicious act of disinformation designed to diminish the Palestinian struggle for human rights and self-determination. This inflammatory misrepresentation willfully misconstrues the fundamental meaning behind the expression as a vision of comprehensive freedom and dignity for all people living between the Jordan River and Mediterranean Sea.
Contrary to these slanderous accusations, the invocation of "from the river to the sea" represents an emancipatory ideal - the aspiration that all inhabitants of historic Palestine, regardless of ethnicity or faith, may one day live in peace, justice and equality. It articulates the hope that oppression, discrimination, and subjugation will be dismantled, giving way to a society where neither colonial dispossession nor segregation determine the fates and rights of any of its peoples.
To falsely conflate this uplifting prospect with genocide is an unconscionable act of propaganda that seeks to demonize the perfectly justifiable demands of the Palestinian people. It paints their yearning to overcome Israel's racist apartheid laws, draconian military occupation, and systemic oppression as somehow tantamount to the very injustices they continue to resist after decades of dehumanizing persecution.
Those crying "genocide" at this call for universal liberties are engaging in a cynical form of projection, perhaps of their own heinous beliefs and views as evidenced in the Likud party’s charter, where they claim ‘from the river to the sea, there will only be Israeli sovereignty’ - accusing their vulnerable victims of desiring the very atrocities that have been perpetrated against them.
Under Zionist occupation, it is the Palestinian people who have endured ethnic cleansing, massacres, land confiscation, and institutionalized discrimination under Israel's regime of supremacy. Their invocations of freedom "from the river to the sea" represent an end to such crimes against humanity, not their perpetration.
This wilful smear is an act of complicity in the continued denial of Palestinian humanity, identity, and rights. It is a shameless tactic to discredit the justness and beauty of their anti-colonial and anti-racist strivings by painting a venerable cause as something untenable and malevolent. In reality, it is those perpetuating occupation, apartheid, and displacement of the indigenous Palestinian people who are advancing the true forces of oppression and ethnic supremacy in the region.
To insist that this emancipatory vision equates to the expulsion of Jewish citizens is also a vicious deception that reinforces a paradigm of segregation and discrimination. The river to the sea idiom seeks the liberation of all peoples within historic Palestine - liberation that is fundamentally incompatible with any form of ethnic expulsion or supremacy.
Instead, it imagines a society where one's ethno-religious identity neither precludes their equality nor human and civil rights, regardless of whether they are Palestinians, Israelis, Jews, Muslims, Christians or any other component of the diverse populace.
At its core, the river to the sea idiom gives a powerful voice to the universal yearning to dismantle all forms of racist oppression, institutionalized discrimination and denial of inalienable human rights.
To brand this righteous civic ideal as genocidal or an affront to Jewish existence is a crass attempt to invert reality and defame those demanding justice, freedom and pluralistic coexistence for all the people of the land. It is a bad-faith rhetorical strategy designed to perpetuate a status quo of subjugation and ethnic domination by falsely portraying the victims as aggressors and oppressors.
Smearing protestors and inciting violence:
The reprehensible act of smearing and inciting violence against pro-Palestinian protesters – even indirectly – represents dangerous attempts to silence advocacy for human rights and suppress criticism of the oppressive policies enacted against the Palestinian people. These unconscionable tactics seek to delegitimize and demonize those standing in solidarity with the struggles against occupation, apartheid, and the denial of self-determination.
By characterizing these demonstrations as violent hate-marches not only serves as an attempt to smear demonstrators in the eyes of the general public but also gaslight them into questioning their own actions. When combined with the false narrative around how these spaces are “unsafe” for Jewish individuals, played up only by inflammatory and incendiary terms like “no go zones” to further divide the movement and block meaningful mass organising between the different pro-Palestinian, anti-genocide and anti-Zionist movements.
This provides a smokescreen to justify forcibly disrupting and violating the fundamental civil liberties of peaceful protestors and conflates lawful expressions of dissent with threats to public order, falsely portraying those decrying injustice as provocateurs and aggressors in need of subjugation by state forces.
This defamatory rhetoric has routinely been deployed by authoritarian regimes throughout history to discredit challengers to their unjust systems of domination and marginalization. By cynically equating criticism of state misconduct with impending chaos, the powerful can recast efforts to hold them accountable as threats to societal stability requiring violent suppression. These divisive strategies are no different to the age-old tactics employed by colonial regimes who label the colonized as terrorists for taking up arms in their quest for liberation.
Those who peddle such dangerous rhetoric against Palestinian activists engage in an obstruction of truth and an assault on the sacrosanct rights of free speech, free assembly and freedom of conscience. They provide ethical and rhetorical cover for the repression of noble grassroots movements born of moral outrage in the face of subjugation and apartheid policies.
This results in the violent suppression of voices by police regimes, a reality we’re already seeing unfold before our very eyes across the global north. While it’s predominantly only extremist individuals committing acts of violence against their peers who are choosing to protest against the active genocide, it’s a worrying trend that should be
Any claims of such demonstrations being “inconvenient” or “not winning any hearts” only demonstrates a fundamental lack of understanding of the core tenets of protests, civil disobedience and the philosophy behind demonstrations. Protests, in their very nature, are intended to disrupt and cause inconvenience, because at the end of the day, they’re a community’s desperate efforts to get their peers to listen, pay attention and take direct action.
By instead ignoring these calls to action and discussing how the protests affect you personally, you not only undermine the wider collective’s efforts but shift focus away from the core goal of saving lives and ensuring equality for all.Defenders of the indefensible find themselves resorting to such duplicitous vilification because they cannot counteract substantive criticism of the injustices and human rights violations they enable through truthful argument and moral reasoning. Smears and incitements become their only available tactics to obfuscate and deflect righteous condemnation.
Those genuinely committed to democratic values and universal human rights must firmly resist such ignoble efforts to denigrate and endanger pro-Palestinian demonstrators. In reality, portraying pro-Palestinian solidarity as an incitement of violence is, in itself, an incitement against the nonviolent civil resistors who represent the continued march toward universal freedom, dignity, and adherence to international law. This vilification of protestors is merely a desperate attempt to preserve an outmoded ethnonationalist order through the weaponization of misinformation and undemocratic physical force.
Conflating Zionism with Judaism:
While the Jewish faith and cultural identity not only long predate and but have no inherent connection to the racist political ideology of Zionism, the modern Israeli regime has deliberately pursued an ethnic supremacist agenda rooted in Jewish ethno-religious identity — yet built upon the demolition of Palestinian homes, the theft of Palestinian lands and the generational uprooting, displacement and dehumanization of the Palestinian people at large.
The harrowing cost of human suffering, loss of life and deprivation of the most basic liberties and security has been unconscionable and now, Zionism represents an utterly deplorable ethnic supremacist ideology that has enabled unconscionable acts of violence, displacement and subjugation against the Palestinian people for almost a century.
Its real-world impacts have been nothing short of a calculated campaign of ethnic cleansing, cultural erasure and apartheid racism - a horrific legacy that cannot be decoupled from Zionism's founding vision of creating an exclusionary Jewish ethno-state through the denial of Palestinian self-determination and indigeneity.
The forced expulsion of over 700,000 Palestinians from their ancestral homes and villages during the Nakba, rendering millions stateless and exiled as refugees, was an act of premeditated ethnic purging. With the willful destruction of Palestinian property, demolition of homes, uprooting of ancient olive groves, and obliteration of cultural resources further demonstrating a systematic effort to erase Palestinian identity, history and any enduring claims to the land.
Subsequent decades have seen this brutal ethnic persecution, land confiscation and denial of human rights institutionalized through severely discriminatory policies, illegal settlements, violence by occupying forces, arbitrary detentions, torture, and most notably, systemic oppression under Israel's racist apartheid regime.
These are not mere "realities" for Palestinians who remain, but grave crimes against humanity perpetrated through Zionism's new brand of unrelenting, institutionalized cruelty. This utterly shameful legacy of calculated ethnic cleansing, apartheid governance and flagrant violations of international law is inextricably intertwined with how Zionism's racist, supremacist and anti-democratic ideology has been implemented on the ground by Israel.
Any attempt to decouple or whitewash these egregious atrocities from Zionism itself is a form of explicit denialism and complicity in oppression of the highest order. No ethnic, religious or any other group deserves an ethno-supremacist theocratic state constructed through the forcible subjugation of indigenous populations as second-class citizens stripped of all rights, dignity and humanity.
Such an abhorrent exclusionary system based on racial hierarchy is fundamentally incompatible with even the barest notion of true democracy, self-determination or universal human rights regardless of ethnicity or faith.
Statehood, sovereignty and self-determination can never legitimately emerge from such systematic violence, discrimination, forced displacement and ethnic persecution as political Zionism has perpetrated against the Palestinian population.
If a state were to arise organically through democratic processes that enshrine equality, safety and liberty for all citizens regardless of ethnicity or faith, it would have legitimacy. But any racist system of ethnic domination erected through brute force subjugation and calculated ethnic supremacy, as Zionism has done, is an egregious affront to justice and human rights that requires being dismantled - not enshrined - with a new equitable path forward established.
Tell us why Zadie Smith should be removed by emailing us at [email protected]