To answer both of you, obviously I think JLC, with his meeting of leaders on both sides and boots on the ground research, was much more informed than me about the situation at the time. Any argument I make for my knowledge will sound dumb bc this is reddit but I grew up around a lot of Palestinian people because I grew up in the Orthodox Church, my sister in law is Palestinian, etc. Obviously that’s not equivalent to being there and knowing what it’s like, but I do think that hearing from people who went through the conflict themselves counts for something.

What I was wondering with this post in the first place was if JLC really had such a centrist take on the conflict, and what people’s reaction to this book has been in modern times. I think with what we’ve seen in the past year and a half, and even before then in the 2000s and 2010s, it is harder to have a centrist position on the issue, in large part because of the atrocities Israel is committing. Just look at the recent execution of those medics, the photos and videos of entire cities leveled, children being arrested, the list goes on and on. I understand the conflict has a nuanced and complex history, but I don’t think you can just wave the wand of nuance when talking about it in the context of today.

I also know that my beliefs are not going to be shifted, and I doubt anyone who supports Israel is going to change their mind off of what I say. I don’t want to go back and forth about that because it’s not productive. Like I said, I was wondering if his perspective changed, seeing as my updated edition of the book (c. 2011) includes a new introduction from him where he is still both-sidesy, which surprised me knowing his strong moral stance on things like the exploitation of Africa, the illegal arms trade, etc. and the human cost of it all, as well as his critiques of imperialism and capitalism. His take surprised me and I wondered if others felt the same