I'm drawing on Keats' "negative capability" thesis to cope with the Middle East crisis
plus owning my pro-Palestinian social media algorithms
I feel it’s important to keep the conversation going on how to better hold what is happening in the Middle East (and beyond). Because we are not holding it well. And we need to. Hold.
As I write this, Israel and Hamas have just agreed to a four-day ceasefire and prisoner exchange. I don’t hold out oodles of hope for the outcome and I suspect it could lead to more layers of fragmentation and despair there and among those of us witnessing it all from afar, via (it must be said) our biased algorithmically determined feeds.1
So how can we hold better? How can we contain and move with the nuances, the uglinesses, the complexities, the absence of discernible “fixes”, and not be tossed off course by a world that is collapsing into tribalism. How can we be the leaders we want to see? Today I share a quandary that I had to navigate this week and that I will flesh out with you, because it’s illustrative; three helpful wisdoms; and an opportunity for those of you living in Sydney and Melbourne.
My wrestle: calling for a ceasefire
On the weekend I shared a carousel of images on Instagram of a peace rally I attended in Paris. It was an apolitical silent march organised by 500-plus French actors, directors and creatives that started out from the Arab Institute and wound its way through the centre of Paris to the Jewish Museum. It was magnificent for its silence, for the symbolism of the start and end points and for the fact it effectively discouraged visible signs of polarisation. There were no Israeli or Palestinian flags and no slogans (that I saw). I saw one Islamic guy handing out white pieces of fabric, which people attached to sticks and used as flags.
I included the word ceasefire in the caption of the post. As I did in last week’s post. I also issued a specific invite in the caption, below, which I then had to edit after 10 minutes with a “PS” to advise I be hiding the polarising comments that, sigh, came flooding in and that largely ignored my message. I hid as many as I could, but I was the proverbial two-handed mortal trying to plug a dyke.
TBH, I was testing things. Could this post possibly inspire people to settle into a more nuanced, humanity-focused, constructive discussion using language and approaches that are conducive to what we are all after and that doesn’t play into the hands of the enemy (a la my perspective here)?
Alas, no.
Just so you all know, not only do I get hit with the hundreds of messages in the public comments of my social feeds, I also get long and often antagonistic essays in my DMs and email inbox from people - including friends - who I presume don’t want to have their heated take viewed by others. They want an intimate audience with me to vent their latent anger and confusion and felt separation. They want me to be their lightening rod.
I make this observation here with you all: Many people who make these comments about my not supporting the “right” side or not being vocal enough for their liking (or too vocal) on the issue do not post about the crisis on their own feeds and/or have a private feed. I feel they are effectively projecting onto me their own sense of powerlessness and fear of not being the leader they want to see. It truly is a fascinating and wholly unfair expectation to place on people in the public eye right now. And this phenomenon is widespread, as per this post:
(And to answer, quickly, why don’t I block the comments? Because, after consideration, I feel it’s important to see and hear where the world is at. I may change my position soon.)
Anyway, why did I decide to support a ceasefire, and why did I wrestle with whether to declare it publicly? A dear Israeli friend of mine who has skin in the game in the peace dialogues in the Middle East emailed me on the matter (calmly and kindly). He challenged me with the idea that "#ceasefire” is both a naïve slogan that does not allow for the complexity of the situation and a term that has been shown to dial up anti-semitic sentiment. I thought I’d share (a lightly edited version of) what I wrote back to him:
I fully get it’s complicated. However, I decided to use the “slogan” for two reasons (which I want to share ‘cos I know you are probably also genuinely wanting to know):
1. When I say ceasefire, I mean it for, and from, both sides. Just as when I discuss caring about the kids, I mean Israeli and Palestinian kids. I agree, many ppl see this as pro-P, but I’d say almost as many see my messaging as pro-I. It’s fuckin’ insane. Plus, I’ve toyed with this - at what point must I take responsibility for how some of the world is interpreting my carefully considered words delivered carefully from a place of peace? I considered this deeply. I decided the horse has bolted on the hate. And I now wish to speak to the bulk of people in my community who are crying out for ppl in my position to issue messages that allow for the nuance etc. They need to have their fear and frustrations represented.2. Given the absurdity, the powerlessness we all feel (while we are subjected to the imagery of the horror) I feel the GP needs to push from the other side and push for the humanity of a ceasefire, even if the slogan is somewhat naive. This is what good members of the GP do - we push for simple, pure moral principles and have to rely on our leaders to then find the compromise and work through the complicated middle ground. I personally feel if we don’t call for the idea of a ceasefire, as an aim, we do lose our humanity. It goes beyond the politics for me now.
I also told my friend that what I took from his email was that a better hashtag might be "#peace”.
As I write this he replied to my email: “Beautiful”.
I am constantly, by the minute, monitoring my response to this crisis and other people’s reactions, plus my responsibilities and my hypocrisies. I am trying to ask questions rather than arrive at conclusions. I tend to be particularly sympathetic to the Palestinian plight2 (and have been for a long time, while holding an equal understanding of and sympathy for the Jewish peoples’ situation) and I condemn the Israeli Government’s response in no small part because I expect more of the “side” that holds itself to be democratic and liberal minded, and this is reflected (as per my footnote below) in the information I am being fed. I literally do not get any pro-Israeli information, or even just Israeli information, in my social feeds. I have to monitor this, question it, test my biases.
What is my role as a figure with a following who is known to be an activist? This is an alive wrestle, but I feel - for now - my role is to keep sharing ways for holding and doing better and most appropriately. This process is mostly about steering discussions back to the fundamentals of our shared morality and humanity.
To this end, a few wisdoms
I found that these words from wise warriors helped steer me a little this week. They might you.
1. Sit in “I don’t know”
Enthusiastic commenter Steve C, pointed me to a podcast episode of Alan Watts sermoning on delegating to the universe. It’s a balm.
There was a line it (that I now paraphrase): Saying “I don’t know”, I don’t know what I want, I don’t know what I think, is the same as saying “I love”.
If anyone wants to pull out the exact line for us all here, that would be great.
2. Develop Negative Capability
The Romantic poet John Keats coined the term “negative capability” to describe the practice of artists sitting in doubt and uncertainty in order to create beauty.
He wrote that this capability is:
“When man is capable of being in uncertainties, Mysteries, doubts, without any irritable reaching after fact & reason.”
“Negative” here is not pejorative. Instead, it implies the ability to resist (say “no” to) explaining away what we do not understand. It is about, instead and as a practice, resting in doubt and continuing to pay attention and to probe in order to understand something more completely. Art is created from this space. He cites Shakespeare’s work, full of mistaken identities and misconceptions, including mixed-up genders, as an example of how and why this works.
Nobel laureate and philosopher Alexander Solzhenitsyn (who wrote one of my favourite books, One Day in the Life of Ivan Denisovich) chimed in on the phenomenon:
“If only there were evil people somewhere insidiously committing evil deeds, and it were necessary only to separate them from the rest of us and destroy them. But the line dividing good and evil cuts through the heart of every human being. And who is willing to destroy a piece of his own heart?”
None of us should destroy a piece of our own heart, or a piece of the heart of humanity.
3. And an Erich Fromm wisdom:
Fromm writes in The Anatomy of Human Destructiveness:
“The statement, ‘Human nature is evil’, is not a bit more realistic than the statement, ‘Human nature is good’. But the first statement is much easier to make: anyone who wants to prove man’s evilness finds followers most readily, for he offers everybody an alibi for his own sins — and seemingly risks nothing. Yet the spreading of irrational despair is in itself destructive, as all untruth is; it discourages and confuses. Preaching irrational faith or announcing false Messiahs is hardly less destructive — it seduces and then paralyzes.
🚨 Another self-monitoring note: I share the above wisdoms not to distance myself from “everyone out there” making the wrong statements and who are incapable of negative capability, but to remind myself (and all of us here) to hold better.
Finally, I think many of you will be nourished by this
Small Giants is hosting the Palestinian peace broker Aziz Abu Sarah in Australia. Aziz is the incredible leader I interviewed on Wild some time back. He will be doing two events, one in Sydney November 28 and another in Melbourne December 5. The event is for peace. “To talk about peace. To talk about understanding. To sit together in grief. To sit together in hope. To learn how to replace fear and hate with love and respect.” You can get tickets here.
I have found a lot of what is landing on my social platforms and into my inbox despairing, hurtful and exhausting. Not so much the differing opinions as the way these opinions and difference are being communicated. I am very grateful to be able to have better and honest conversations here. The way we make sense and do the moral wrestle matters more than ever.
Hashtag Peace to you all,
Sarah xx
PS Here’s this week’s Wild episode again:
I have had to confront, over the past few weeks, the slants of my various feeds. Instagram, working to sophisticated algorithms, is almost wholly pro-Palestine. My Substack newsletters, emanating from a consciously chosen array of centre-right and left heterodox thinkers, has a lot of (often) uncomfortably parochial pro-Israel viewpoints.
Per my point here, I felt it important to be upfront about my historical position.
Hi Sarah:
Honestly - I am done with this whole situation. Organizations that I am interested in or support are getting burned on social media for not saying anything and then when they do it is offensive to everyone. Everyone wants you to have an opinion about Palestine and Israel and if you don't you're uncaring or ignorant. I am wondering where all these passionate social justice instagram warriors have been the last 10-15 years on this conflict. Why must everyone have to say something about this, even if you know nothing at all? Why is the same attention not being sent to Sudan (where an actual genocide is currently taking place)? Remember Ukraine? Apparently not relevant anymore. Yemen, who? This is just what I see on social media and in news coverage across the world. You have to seek out information about the last three conflicts and those have been ongoing for many years.
It's just so frustrating that everything has to be so tribal and for us or against us and there is absolutely no room for nuance or discussion in any situation. I'm writing this from a hotel room in Norway (the home of the Nobel Peace Prize ironically enough). In the square down the street there have been ongoing peace vigils for Ukraine and Palestine every night we have been here. Including a torch march one evening. People do care - as Sarah has mentioned many times here before silence doesn't mean a lack of care (please correct me if I am wrong!). I want peace and I love how you defined that in this post.
Honestly there are very few safe spaces left out there to have discussions like this and I am grateful for yours.
Sarah, I love you , your courage , your honesty and what you are bravely sharing . You are getting a lot of flack, yet you keep going. You are encouraging even those , like myself who think they have a good understanding of the situation to consider our responses. Being with you on this wild and precious ride, I am full of admiration and gratitude . This is what really struck home “I feel the GP needs to push from the other side and push for the humanity of a ceasefire, even if the slogan is somewhat naive. This is what good members of the GP do - we push for simple, pure moral principles and have to rely on our leaders to then find the compromise and work through the complicated middle ground.” We are on the side of humanity 💗. I trust us not our leaders, they have not shown any humanity, sense or morality they have no interest in us being at peace.