Earlier we linked to this Harry’s Place guest post by Shlomo Yosef – ‘How to kill a movement over a weekend‘.
The piece is an example of boycotters working to entrench conflict and condemn peace-makers as collaborators. The boycott campaign depends on this, Harry’s Place has always been in the forefront of highlighting examples, and that is just one of the reasons we value Harry’s Place.
However, as our follower Ben White correctly pointed out on Twitter, the piece is also a good example of anti-boycott rhetoric going beyond what is acceptable. Ali Abunimah has never called himself “the mullah from Chicago”, nor has he issued anything he described as a “fatwa”. How does this language serve an anti-boycott cause? It does not. What it does is risk hostile, perhaps sub-conscious, connections being formed between Muslim and boycott. It was wrong to bring Islam into this, we don’t want to go there, neither should Shlomo Yosef, and neither should you. We hope that disrupts any such association.
Read the piece with that in mind, take from it an example of boycotters wrecking peace, and note that just as it is possible for criticism of Israel to be antisemitic and criticism of Margaret Thatcher to be misogynistic, it is also possible for criticism of people with Muslim names to contain anti-Muslim bigotry.