By J. M. Lane
1. Summary
1.1 How Palestine Became Important to Native American Studies
The purpose of this book is to explore the changing fields of study comparing two distinctly different, perhaps similar in other ways, cultures far away from each other. The focus has largely been related to intertribal studies, however, scholars are beginning to relate Native Americans and Palestinians on both a cultural and geographic level. The interest of this book can be explained in the following research questions:
“How does the presence of Palestine in the field shape and define its limits and possibilities? What are the terms and frameworks for useful comparative scholarship? Are there material politics at stake in comparing America and Palestine?” (Salaita, 2016; p. 2).
There are three main reasons the author presents in order to show why more scholars are interested in comparing Native American colonial issues to that of the Palestinians. First, there is a growing number of advocate groups and social media actors discussing the ties between the Native American and Palestinian fates at the hands of outside groups. Second, scholars are more frequently describing the Palestinians as indigenous to a specific territory, thereby giving credence to their ties to a geographic space. Third, the rise in public discourse has been proliferated by movements such as Boycott, Divestment, and Sanctions (BDS). This movement has called for the boycotting of Israel in an attempt to force the Israeli government to follow international laws regarding colonialism.
1.2 Boycotting Israel as Native Nationalism
In 2013, the American Studies Association (ASA) voted and passed a resolution, with a 68% vote, to honor an academic boycott of Israel. Public opinion was immediately managed by the corporate media and a score of university Presidents lambasted the ASA for violating academic freedom. Many state governments passed legislation that removed funding for universities that supported the boycott. This boycott is a major part of the BDS movement. Many of the ASA members received threats and several public figures decried the organization’s actions.
So how does the BDS movement relate to Native Studies? According to the author, there is division amongst Native scholars over this movement and some argue that it is unrelated to their field. Salaita is asking that Native scholars consider the BDS movement related to the overarching study of colonial and neocolonial relationships between those core powers and the periphery societies. While he does not argue directly, he does insinuate the extension of BDS style movements to the realm of Native American communities; using this as a way to spur the decolonization of Native American territories and honor national sovereignty.
1.3 Ethnic Cleansing as National Uplift
There is a unique link between the historical foundations of Native American displacement and the seizing of Palestinian land. Salaita compares the presidency of Andrew Jackson to that of political life of Ze’ev Vladimir Jabotinsky. Both men were prominent figures in public life both in the US and Israel respectively and publicly supported the removal of native population from their homelands. Salaita takes the opportunity to link Judeo-Christian beliefs on the ideas of a chosen people as the reasons that both the United States and Israel sought to expand territory against indigenous people.
This portion of the book analyzes speeches and writings from both figures concluding that both Jackson and Jabotinsky felt the removal of indigenous peoples was both liberal and generous due to the savage nature of these groups. More specifically, Jackson refers to ‘good’ men as a means to garner support for the US system. Good men support expansion while bad men oppose the removal of Native Americans. The use of nationalistic rhetoric allows him to rationalize his actions. Both men use populistic language to defend the ‘moral’ foundation of their actions. These two men are not the only similar political figures between the US and Israel, but, in the view of Salaita, they best exemplify inter/nationalism in action.
1.4 Inter/National Aesthetics: Palestinians in Native Poetry
There is a unique similarity between Palestinian and Native American poetry that might provide an explanation of inter/nationalism. Salaita argues that even the act of reading Palestinian and Native American poetry is an inter/national practice. Many Native American poetic works portray Palestine as a concrete location and treat it as an extension of their own culture. Using the modern struggle over independence within the context of Palestine, Native American poetry often uses their own struggle as a comparison. This poetry generally focuses on Palestine as the main theme, not the atrocities perpetrated by the Israeli state. These works are used to link the decolonizing efforts of both Native Americans and Palestinians.
1.5 Why American Indian Studies Should be Important to Palestinian Solidarity
This chapter explores the reasons why American Indian studies should embrace Palestinian studies. Salaita believes that the American Indian scholarly community is pivotal in accomplishing the liberation of Palestine from Israel. According to Salaita, many scholars have pushed forward the belief that the colonization of America is what eventually led to the colonization of Palestine. Salaita uses this opportunity to complain about his dismissal at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign (UIUC). He argues that American Indian studies’ support for Palestinian decolonization might have an adverse effect on the field but will benefit tremendously the groups being studied.
1.6 Conclusion: The Game of Our Time
While this book took the perspective of a sociological study, it was profoundly geographic in nature. Scale and location all play major roles in the issues discussed. Relating the overarching issues discussed, Salaita describes the realities of Palestine and Native studies to the board game, Settlers of Catan. The franchise released a Settlers of Canaan series based on biblical references and later released a Settlers of America edition. The Settlers board game franchise discovered the inherent similarities between the two time periods. Both have a biblical theme: a land promised by God to a group of settlers. There is a mystery surrounding both indigenous populations, describing them as fantastic creatures. Salaita argues that these games prove that the plight of both groups are but a mystery saga only applicable in the realm of board games. The prospects are upsetting, largely because colonization is not a game.
2. Critique
2. 1 Soundness of Argument
The author’s overarching argument was for a more integrated study of Native American and Palestinian colonization by an outside power. The author uses the term inter/nationalism to describe this discourse. The author provides a comprehensive list of events that led to a more integrated approach to studying Native America and Palestine. He lists and describes in great detail these events through the growth of public discourse but does not provide much detail on the increasing scholarly debate until much later in the book. Even in that exposé, he still does not provide enough scholarly sources for his argument. It seems as though it is a popular topic in society at large but is only recently becoming a topic in academia. While he does mention this in later chapters, it would have been helpful if provided within some context at the beginning of the book.
Inter/nationalism is defined early, but is not clarified until much later in the book. He writes, “we have available an example of how Palestine can be of interest to American Indian studies, this case through inter/national analysis performed by multiethnic and interdisciplinary academics” (p. 5). This does not provide a clear definition but the reader can imply the meaning from this statement. This is problematic throughout the book; the reader must jump to conclusions about the theme of the book at times due to the rambling order of the book.
Salaita should have chosen another title. While his theme was inter/nationalism, the term became difficult to understand throughout reading the book, but another theme became apparent: decolonization. This was the hidden theme discussed on every page. Nation, national, nationality, and nationalism were all used in some form or fashion but never adequately defined. Salaita even states that the idea of inter/nationalism was more related to decolonization than that of national identity. It took until chapter 3 before he discussed nationalism as an idea, without ever referring directly to the word.
This book provided a plethora of information on the plight of the Palestinian people but failed to provide adequate details on that of the Native Americans. Salaita did not spend equal space discussing both groups. In fact, a large portion of the book was spent blasting his dissenters. While defending the BDS movement Salaita states, “universities have never been especially accommodating of dissent, and have been downright hostile to dissent that challenges state power” (p.39). While this statement may be true, how does it relate to the topic of inter/national studies between Palestine and Native Indians? In fact, why should the BDS movement take up as much space as it did in the book?
Salaita attempted to rationalize linking together the study of different nationalities by comparing Palestinians to Native Americans. The book gives detailed information about the author and the movements in which he is involved, however, this may only be tangential to the theme of the book. A plethora of information is a good thing, only if it directly pertains to the subject. Information in this book provided detail insight into movements and problems in the academic community but did not provide much detail on the current struggles of the Palestinian and Native American people. While it did provide some information, the large amount of information covered personal stories and details behind the BDS movement.
2.2 Methodologies
The first two chapters provided abundant details concerning both Palestine and the BDS movement but generally stayed clear of any definitive methodologies. A methodological framework does not appear until the beginning of chapter 3. “I have a soft spot for forthrightness, quite independent of moral probity.” Understanding historical viewpoints differing from our own “enables us to engage the ethical and philosophical content of a scholar, activist, or ideologue, even (especially) those we deplore” (Salaita, 2016, p. 71). These statements best exemplify that of a critical theorist.
According to Kincheloe and McLaren (2002), critical theory was a backlash against rationalism and enlightenment objectivity. The purpose of critical theory research is to break down problems within the current system in terms of those in power and the exploited. The origins of critical theory can be found in neo-Marxist theory boring from Karl Marx’s own methodological approach, historical materialism. Historical materialism’s theoretical approach begins with the perspective that current and historical trends can be explained by critically evaluating economic interactions, specifically control over the means of production (De Nys, 1978).
Unpacking Salaita’s theoretical and methodological approach was rather difficult; however, he does revert to a materialist framework within chapter 3. When referring to the public and private character of Andrew Jackson and Ze’ev Vladimir Jabotinsky, he states “I am particularly interested in the (unacknowledged) assumptions underlying their discourses, which produce a remarkable dialectic whose simple complexity I illuminate” (Salaita, 2016, p. 72). Here he is attempting to bring attention to the internal and external opposing forces within these two public figures (thesis, antithesis) and conclusory solutions (synthesis).
2.3 What's Missing?
There is a major misunderstanding of relations between Israel and Palestine, and Salaita attempts to shed some light on the darker side of this relationship. While his attempt is admirable, he fails to give equal space for Native American colonialism. From the outside, the purpose of this book appeared to be the outline of a new theoretical framework for researching similar cultures impacted by colonialism. Salaita spent a large portion of the book explaining the purpose of the Israeli academic boycott but failed to adequately define nationalism or explain the meaning of the title. To make the book more complete, he should have provided a more detailed report of the plight of the Native American people, spending far less time discussing the BDS movement.
Salaita needs to spend less time talking about himself and focus on the events surrounding both Palestinians and Native American tribes. Chapter 1 was an informative introduction to the plight of the Palestinians, however, chapter 2 was unnecessary. Salaita should have taken the opportunity to provide a more detailed report on similar events that occurred during the colonization of the United States and Israel. The best chapters in the book (chapter 3 and 4) discuss, in great detail, the similarities between folk heroes from both countries and poetic discourse. This should have occurred throughout the book.
Overall, I would recommend the book, but with a caveat: be sure to read chapter 3 before you put the book down. It is difficult to get past chapter 2 because of the repetitiveness and divisive commentary. It should be taken into consideration that Salaita is defending his stance on Palestine in the face of hostile opposition, so he spends a large portion of the book rationalizing his position. The author should take this into consideration in future publications.
3. References
De Nys, M. (1978). Marx's Historical Materialism. In Proceedings of the American Catholic Philosophical Association (Vol. 52, pp. 177-187).
Kincheloe, J. L., & McLaren, P. (2002). Rethinking Critical Theory and Qualitative Research. In Y. Zou & E. T. Trueba (Eds.), Ethnography and Schools: Qualitative Approaches to the Study of Education (pp. 87-138). Lanham, MD: Rowman & Littlefield Publishers.
Salaita, S. G. (2016). Inter/Nationalism: Decolonizing Native America and Palestine. Minneapolis, MN: University of Minnesota Press.
Comentários