Zadie Smith argues that protest slogans are “weapons of mass destruction” in a new pretentious and navel-gazing article and she does it while a literal genocide ravages Gaza. I am sick of ignorant and tone-deaf writers who feel like they can lecture us from their lavish homes.
If you want to know why Zadie Smith is two-siding a genocide after 8 months of indefensible bloodshed, Andrea Long Chu nailed it in How Zadie Smith Lost Her Teeth: vulture.com/article/zadie-…
Israelis: We are dealing with human animals, spear no woman and child. We want to annihilate everyone in Gaza now. College protesters: We want Palestinians to live with freedom and dignity Zadie Smith: these are the same language
Zadie Smith claiming that the words of children protesting genocide are 'weapons of mass destruction', and you know, not the actual weapons of mass destruction used by Zionists to murder people is utterly repulsive, indefensible, and purely evil. Good grief, what a fraud
zadie smith's position is actually the same as most of our quietest, big-brained, very sophisticated colleagues in the university, who think that articulating a (consequential) political position is a sign of naïveté, stupidity, even boorishness.
Between Zadie Smith and Ocean Vuong, can we kill the idea of the writer as a sage observer dislocated from actual struggle? Can we dead the notion of the witness whose 'objectivity' is derived from non-participation? Struggle in our midst or just be silent, please.
