Change

Variation, Selection, and the Evolution of Nature and Society (by Prof. Mazin Qumsiyeh)

One of the most powerful ideas in science is also one of the simplest: things change, and a changing and complex environment decides which changes survive. In biology that's the whole engine of evolution and we can draw lessons from that to the accelerating pace of social evolution and changing paradigms. Organisms vary from one generation to the next, some of that variation gets passed down, and the environment acts like a filter — traits that help an organism survive and reproduce tend to spread, while traits that hurt tend to fade. Given enough time, variation and selection working together can reshape entire populations, which is how we ended up with the biological complexity and diversity of life around us. Mutation is one of the main sources of that variation. Every time genetic material gets copied, small errors are produced. My own research also shows that species that survive in changing environment also produce more variation to give their progeny more possibilities of survival. Wolves for example have high chromosome numbers allowing for more variation and hence it was possible to domesticate them quickly and produce the amazing variety of dogs we see today. Same for cows and sheep. Most genetic changes do little or nothing; some are harmful; a few turn out to be useful in a given environment. A trait that's an advantage today can become neutral, or even a liability, once conditions shift.

Natural selection then acts on whatever variation is there. No organism chooses to evolve. It's simpler than that: individuals whose traits happen to suit their circumstances tend to survive and reproduce a bit more often, and their offspring inherit those traits, so the traits become more common over time. Repeat that across generations and the population itself changes. It's tempting to read this as a march toward perfection, but that's not what's happening. Evolution doesn't aim for perfect organisms, and it doesn't necessarily aim for complexity either. What it produces is organisms good enough for a particular place and moment — nothing more, and there's no finish line it's working toward.   But variation remains and mutation rates remain. That is why for example among our species some 2% of people have mutations and problems ranging from thallasemia to Down Syndrome (hundreds of medically important types of genetic disorders).

 

Part of the reason why variation is encouraged is that the environment itself never holds still. Climate shifts, predators and prey evolve together, diseases emerge, food supplies rise and fall, new competitors show up, landscapes change. So evolution isn't organisms adjusting to a fixed backdrop — it's a running conversation between changing organisms and a changing world. Which points to a broader lesson: survival isn't about being well suited to today's conditions. It's about being able to keep up with tomorrow's.

That idea can draw lessons beyond biology. It is now being perfected with machine learning (artificial intelligence) to even create and virtually test everything from new drugs to new weapons. For society, we can draw positive lessons from this. Human societies develop new ideas like new genes and new mutations. Sometimes these are called memes and they can also spread if they are useful in particular circumstances. A new religion or philossphical tradition may spread if it is more advantageous than previous ones. While social change doesn't run on Darwinian selection in a literal sense, principles of change still apply. Societies generate huge amounts of variation: new ideas, technologies, institutions, customs, theories, ways of solving problems. But the ones that flourish are ones that do not get fixated on the past and stop changing. After all, change is dynamic and everywhere. 

What sets humans apart is that we can create variation on purpose. We can imagine alternatives before they exist, experiment, argue, invent, copy, tweak, and learn from mistakes. A society facing a new problem can generate thousands of possible responses and then, through trial and error and public debate, work out which ones actually hold up. Look at the last few centuries: the agricultural revolution that happened here in the Fertile Crescent 12 millenia ago reshaped settlement and food production. Europe languished in religious orthodoxy for hundreds of years creating so much misery. Shedding that and evolving new paradigms (renaissance) was certainly progressive in every sense of that word. The Islamic world had a golden age when various strands of thought were allowed and encouraged advancing sciences from Algebra (an Arabic word) to astronomy. Standards of living flourished. The printing press changed how knowledge spread and industrialization remade work, transportation, and city life. Electricity and telecommunications shrank distance and computers and the internet rewired how we exchange information. Now AI, biotechnology, robotics, and renewable energy are doing it again changing the environment individuals and institutions have to operate in. Non of our inventions or ideas is good or bad in abstract or good or bad in all circumstances. They work during a particular environment (ecosystem) but may become harmful if the ecosystem changes. This is why change is constant! Those that develop (sometimes a good idea) may suffer when the idea no longer serves its environment. That is why religious orthodoxy can end up causing horrors. That is why Zionism is causing not only a genocide but a collective suicide: sticking to paradigms in a world that has changed.

Each time, old habits run into new conditions. Some institutions adapt. Others dig in. Ideas that once seemed radical become ordinary; innovations that looked promising quietly fail; things once dismissed out of hand become central. This is where the biological metaphor earns its keep: a fast-changing environment rewards variation and experimentation. When circumstances move quickly and institutions, societies, and individuals don't, the outcome for them is extinction. Institutions and individuals that have accumulated success can get attached to the habits that produced it — understandably, but not harmlessly. If something worked repeatedly in the past, people start assuming it always will. Rules harden into traditions, traditions into conventions, conventions into assumptions, and assumptions eventually get treated as truths nobody questions anymore. But the environment isn't obligated to keep an institution comfortable.

Adapting requires a steady supply of alternatives. Societies need people asking different questions, proposing unfamiliar solutions, and testing new approaches -not by throwing out what's already known- but by treating that knowledge as a foundation to build on rather than a fence to stay inside. That's really why variation matters intellectually and socially, not just biologically. A society where everyone thinks the same way gets conformity, but conformity narrows the range of responses available when things change as they ALWAYS do. Intellectual diversity widens that range. Some new ideas will fail and that is the nature of things. What matters is whether we learn from the failures.

The analogy of nature and human society has some limits. Selection works differently for us than it does in nature. We can evaluate ideas consciously and  even test them theoretically without the cost of death or lack of reproductions as happens in nature. We can research whether an idea (a meme) will actually improves people's lives in the current environment. We can ask and test many hypotheses and then consciously decide to implement. That's a real advantage. That is the power of knowledge. The most adaptable societies aren't necessarily the richest or the oldest. They're the ones that learn quickly, experiment freely, admit mistakes, and change direction when the evidence says to. The same holds for individuals. Anyone who treats their identity, knowledge, or worldview as permanently settled becomes fragile and vulnerable the moment circumstances shift. Education should be directed to building the capacity to ask new questions and revise the old ones staying attuned to changing worlds. My grandfather wrote me this when I was 17 years old “The world is changing ..so shed the mental chains that society and religion created around your brain and embrace the change”.

None of this means shedding key principles. The main principles including the golden rule “do no harm, treat people as you wish to be treated. Someone can remain committed to justice, dignity, or scientific inquiry while completely rethinking how that commitment plays out under new conditions. Sometimes staying true to a principle is exactly what requires giving up an old practice. This matters right now because AI is reshaping what expertise, education, research, and work even mean. The right response isn't to defend every old method just because it's familiar, and it isn't to embrace every new tool just because it's new. It's to experiment, evaluate, keep what works, drop what doesn't, and keep going and changing.

There's an intellectual humility built into all of this. No organism has full knowledge of the environment it's heading into, and no person or society can know exactly which ideas will hold up decades from now. The sensible response to that uncertainty isn't false certainty — it's staying capable of learning. Being "progressive," in this sense, isn't about a fixed checklist of positions; it's a willingness to revise views as evidence changes. Being "radical" can just mean going back to a problem's roots and questioning what everyone else has stopped questioning. And being "nimble" means staying flexible enough to change before circumstances force the issue.

The deepest lesson of evolution comes down to two words: variation and selection. Biology generates variation and lets environments sort through it. Culture generates an even wider range of possibilities through human creativity, knowledge, and communication, and societies test those possibilities against experience and evidence.

A healthy society makes room for new ideas — tolerating experimentation, protecting inquiry, allowing dissent, and letting failed approaches be dropped without losing the appetite to try again. It doesn't mistake stability for stagnation, or tradition for truth.

The world is changing faster than it used to, across nearly every dimension, and technological shifts can remake the social landscape within a single generation, sometimes within a few years. The biggest risk in that environment is assuming that what worked before will keep working. My main worry is that things like the climate change or a nuclear war will eliminate human civilization because we failed to collectively change course in the time needed. And time is another component. A species may still go extinct even if it has variation simply because there was not enough time or enough accelerated change to make the critical difference.

Nature rewards variation, responsiveness, and adaptation for individuals and societies alike. The fast pace of change around us require fast change in our ways of thinking. We now have the tools to do that more than in any other period in human history of 3 million years. We must embrace the change.

Moral courage vs. Cowardice

Prof. Mazin Qumsiyeh

History rarely asks ordinary people to perform extraordinary acts. More often, it presents simple moral choices: to tell the truth or remain silent, to defend the vulnerable or look away, to challenge injustice or accommodate it. Palestine has become one of those defining moral tests of our era. It reveals not only the brutality of occupation, displacement, discrimination, and war, but also the character of those who witness these realities. It distinguishes between moral courage and moral cowardice.

Moral courage is not the absence of fear. Rather, it is the willingness to act ethically despite fear, inconvenience, social pressure, or personal cost. Moral cowardice, by contrast, is the decision to subordinate conscience to comfort, career, ideology, or conformity. Sometimes it is exhibited in the escapist rhetoric that it is "complicated," and hence what can I do but to listen to "both sides" (slaves and slave owners, supporters of apartheid and those who oppose he!). These traits transcend nationality, religion, ethnicity, and political affiliation. Among Palestinians, Israelis, and international observers alike, one finds inspiring examples of courage as well as troubling examples of silence or complicity that results in prolonging the suffering.

The history of social progress demonstrates that moral courage has always been the engine of change. The abolition of slavery, women's suffrage, labor rights, civil rights movements, decolonization struggles, and the defeat of apartheid in South Africa all depended on individuals willing to challenge prevailing systems of power. They faced ridicule, imprisonment, professional ostracism, violence, or worse. Yet history now remembers them not as radicals but as pioneers of justice.

Palestine belongs within this broader tradition. It is not unique because injustice exists only there; injustice exists everywhere. Rather, Palestine illustrates with unusual clarity how systems of domination are sustained not merely by military force but also by narratives, bureaucracies, financial interests, diplomatic protection, and public silence. Every checkpoint, demolished home, imprisoned child, confiscated olive grove, or displaced community is made possible not only by those directly implementing these policies but also by countless others who decide that speaking out is too risky or too inconvenient.

This insight echoes the observation frequently attributed to Edmund Burke that "the only thing necessary for the triumph of evil is for good people to do nothing." Although historians question whether Burke ever wrote these exact words, the sentiment captures a profound ethical truth. Injustice survives because too many people choose passivity.

Among Palestinians, moral courage is often expressed through remarkable resilience. Teachers continue educating children despite repeated disruptions. Physicians work under impossible conditions. Farmers return to cultivate lands despite harassment or destruction. Journalists continue documenting events despite grave risks. Artists preserve memory through culture, while scientists, environmentalists, and educators continue building institutions for future generations. Such courage does not eliminate suffering, but it affirms human dignity.

Yet Palestinians are not immune from moral failure. Some become resigned to corruption, factionalism, intolerance, or internal abuses. Others may remain silent when injustice is committed within their own communities. Moral consistency demands that courage includes confronting one's own society as well as external oppression.

Among Israelis, moral courage often requires confronting powerful social and political pressures. Israeli human rights defenders, lawyers, journalists, academics, former soldiers, medical professionals, and conscientious objectors who document abuses or oppose discriminatory policies frequently endure public vilification, legal harassment, professional consequences, and social isolation. Their voices remind us that citizenship does not require unquestioning loyalty to state policy. Indeed, genuine patriotism may require holding one's own government accountable to universal ethical standards.

At the same time, many Israelis either actively support policies that inflict severe harm on Palestinians or accept them as unavoidable. Others avoid engaging with uncomfortable realities because acknowledging them might challenge deeply held beliefs or social identities. The mechanisms are familiar: fear, denial, selective empathy, historical trauma, and political polarization. Understanding these mechanisms does not excuse them. Every society must confront the ethical consequences of normalizing the suffering of others.

Internationally, the spectrum is equally broad. Thousands of humanitarian workers, researchers, journalists, lawyers, students, religious leaders, artists, and ordinary citizens have invested enormous effort in documenting violations, advocating for peace, providing humanitarian assistance, and defending international law. Many have accepted reputational risks, employment consequences, public harassment, or political attacks. Their work exemplifies moral courage because it places principle above personal advantage.

Yet international moral cowardice may be even more consequential. Governments frequently invoke universal human rights selectively, applying one standard to allies and another to adversaries. Universities sometimes hesitate to protect academic freedom when Palestine becomes controversial. Media organizations occasionally frame events in ways that obscure asymmetries of power or normalize recurring violence. Corporations may continue profiting from activities linked to occupation or conflict while avoiding ethical scrutiny. Individuals who privately recognize injustice often remain publicly silent to avoid controversy. Silence itself becomes a political act.

Psychology offers insight into why this occurs. The famous experiments of Solomon Asch demonstrated the power of conformity. Stanley Milgram revealed how ordinary individuals may obey authority even when doing so conflicts with conscience. Philip Zimbardo explored how institutional roles can shape behavior. More recent research on moral disengagement by Albert Bandura explains how euphemistic language, diffusion of responsibility, dehumanization, and displacement of responsibility enable people to tolerate harmful actions without perceiving themselves as unethical. These mechanisms are not peculiar to any nationality; they are vulnerabilities of the human condition.

History repeatedly warns us about the dangers of indifference. Martin Luther King Jr. observed that "In the end, we will remember not the words of our enemies, but the silence of our friends." Elie Wiesel similarly argued that neutrality helps the oppressor rather than the victim. Archbishop Desmond Tutu expressed the same principle when he wrote that if one remains neutral in situations of injustice, one has chosen the side of the oppressor. These statements should not be interpreted as demands for simplistic political alignment. Rather, they remind us that ethical responsibility extends beyond avoiding wrongdoing ourselves; it includes responding when others suffer preventable harm.

The challenge, however, is not merely to condemn moral cowardice. Condemnation alone rarely changes minds. More constructive is understanding how courage develops. Moral courage grows through education that encourages critical thinking rather than propaganda. It grows through relationships that humanize perceived adversaries. It grows through institutions that protect freedom of expression and academic inquiry. It grows when individuals witness others speaking honestly despite pressure. Courage, like fear, can be contagious.

Palestine therefore presents an opportunity not only for political reflection but also for moral education. Every person can ask difficult questions. Do I seek information from diverse and credible sources? Do I apply the same ethical standards regardless of nationality, ethnicity, or religion? Do I excuse violations committed by those I identify with while condemning identical actions by others? Have I remained silent because speaking might carry personal costs? These questions are relevant whether one lives in Gaza, Jerusalem, Tel Aviv, Washington, London, Johannesburg, Tokyo, or São Paulo.

Ultimately, the struggle between moral courage and moral cowardice is not fundamentally about Palestine. It is about humanity. Palestine simply magnifies dilemmas that exist everywhere: whether power is constrained by ethics, whether truth prevails over propaganda, whether empathy extends beyond tribal boundaries, and whether ordinary people choose conscience over convenience.

Future generations will undoubtedly examine this period as historians now examine slavery, colonialism, segregation, apartheid, and other systems of institutionalized injustice. They will ask what people knew, what they chose to believe, what they did, and what they failed to do. They will recognize that some individuals—Palestinian, Israeli, and international—demonstrated remarkable moral courage by defending universal human dignity despite enormous pressure. They will also recognize that many others, through silence, indifference, rationalization, or active participation, allowed preventable suffering to continue.

The lesson is timeless. Moral courage seldom changes the world overnight. Yet every lasting movement for justice has begun with individuals willing to speak an inconvenient truth. Their example invites each of us to ask not which side history will judge most harshly, but whether our own actions reflect the values we profess. In that sense, Palestine is not only a political question. It is a mirror in which humanity sees its own conscience.

One democratic state

The predicted imminent collapse in the West Bank (a prelude to the Gaza scenario) is begining to happen: no gas, no money, ethnic cleansing, pogroms by settlers etc. This should remind us of certain truths. For decades, people of conscience around the world have worked tirelessly
for justice in Palestine. We have marched, educated, organized, documented violations of international law, supported humanitarian relief, and challenged systems of oppression. Your dedication has helped transform global awareness. What once seemed unspeakable is now
widely discussed: apartheid, settler colonialism, ethnic cleansing, corruption of the Oslo created regime, and the denial of fundamental human rights.

Public opinions shifted dramatically because a genocide is a game changer. Yet awareness alone is not enough. We must also have the courage to advocate for a political vision that is just, practical, and rooted in universal human rights. That vision is one democratic state in all of historic Palestine. It is the only solution. It is moral, just, and achievable.

Many of us long argued that it was a delusion to think of "two states solution" for the logical reasons you can see in my 2004 book Sharing the Land of Canaan (available here
https://qumsiyeh.org/sharingthelandofcanaan/ ). But even those who supported that idea of "two states" with good intentions oer ut of ignorance have now come to realize the intrinsic nature of Zionism: expanding colonial control (now also Lebanon and Syria), settlements, annexation, fragmentation of Palestinian communities, discriminatory laws, military brutality, pogroms, and the genocide and ethnic cleansing. For decades now, we did have one state from the river to the sea ruled by an apartheid regime. We should not continue to pursue a mythical political formula that does not corresponds to reality. Instead, we must work toward a future that does.

The alternative is not endless conflict but a single democratic state based on equality before the law, equal citizenship regardless of religion or ethnicity, constitutional protections for all communities, and full respect for international law and universal human rights. Such a state would recognize the dignity and security of all people regardless of their religion (or lack thereof) while addressing historical injustices through truth, accountability, restitution,
reconciliation, and the implementation of internationally recognized rights, including the rights of Palestinian refugees. This is a post-Zionist (post-colonialist) world that is the ONLY course short of catastrophic global war that destroyes our civilization.

We learn from history that some 170 countries arrived at a postcolonial history where descendants of colonizers and descedents of colonized share the country (although to various degrees of decolonization). We learn that colonial struggles rarely end-up in scenatrios like those in Algeria (removal of colonies) or the US and Australia (large scale genocide). We also see many examples of societies overcoming entrenched systems of discrimination and racism.
South Africa's transition from apartheid is one example, though every
society must find its own path. Durable peace is built not by
separating peoples behind walls or in concentratoin camps (as
happening here) but by guaranteeing equal rights, shared institutions,
and mutual respect.

This vision rejects supremacy in all its forms. It affirms that no one can achieve lasting freedom by denying the freedom of another. We are destined to share this land. The real question is whether we will do so under a regime of domination or within a democratic society where
every individual enjoys equal rights and equal responsibilities. The international solidarity movement now has an opportunity and a responsibility to help shape this future. Instead of defending unrealistic diplomatic formulas, we should build a broad movement around clear principles:

Equality for every human being.
An end to discrimination and systems of ethnic or religious privilege.
Full implementation of international law and human rights.
Justice for refugees and all victims of displacement.
Democratic governance with constitutional protections for everyone.
Reconciliation based on truth, accountability, justice, and shared humanity.

This is not merely an idealistic aspiration. It is the only realistic democratic and achievable solution. Every year that passes without equality deepens injustice and makes future reconciliation more difficult while bringing teh world to the edge of catastrophe (as is seen now with the ilegal Israeli/US war on Iran and other countries t advance perceived Zionist interests). Movements change history. They begin with ordinary people who refuse to accept injustice or the mindless march to armageddon as inevitable and who organize around a compelling moral and just vision. The campaign for one democratic state requires educators, students, artists, faith communities, trade unions, academics, legal scholars, health professionals, environmentalists, and all people committed to justice.

We invite you to join us in building this movement. Let us replace despair with hope, division with partnership, and exclusion with equality. Let us work together so that every child born between the Jordan River and the Mediterranean Sea or born in exile grows up with dignity and peace. The future belongs not to separation and domination but to democracy, equality, and our shared humanity. Please join the BDS campaign (http://bdsmovement.net) and also the One Democratic State campaign (https://onestatecampaign.org/en/). Read, discuss, organize, educate, and help build the broad international movement that this historic moment demands.

The time is now.

Mazin Qumsiyeh

دولة ديمقراطية واحدة

الانهيار المتوقع في الضفة الغربية (مقدمة لما حدث في غزة) بدأ يتحقق: انقطاع البترول، وانقطاع التمويل، والتطهير العرقي، والمذابح التي يرتكبها المستوطنون، وغير ذلك. وهذا يُذكّرنا ببعض الحقائق. فعلى مدى عقود، عمل أصحاب الضمائر الحية في جميع أنحاء العالم بلا كلل من أجل العدالة في فلسطين. لقد تظاهرنا، ووعّينا الناس، ونظّمنا الفعاليات، ووثّقنا انتهاكات القانون الدولي، ودعمنا الإغاثة الإنسانية، وتحدّينا أنظمة القمع. لقد ساهم تفانيكم في تغيير الوعي العالمي. ما كان يُعتبر في السابق أمرًا لا يُوصف أصبح الآن موضوع نقاش واسع: الفصل العنصري، والاستعمار الاستيطاني، والتطهير العرقي، وفساد النظام الذي أُنشئ بموجب اتفاقية أوسلو، وإنكار الحقوق الأساسية للإنسان.

لقد تغيّر الرأي العام بشكل جذري لأن الإبادة الجماعية تُغيّر قواعد اللعبة. ومع ذلك، فإن الوعي وحده لا يكفي. يجب أن نتحلى أيضًا بالشجاعة للدفاع عن رؤية سياسية عادلة وعملية ومتجذّرة في حقوق الإنسان . هذه الرؤية هي دولة ديمقراطية واحدة في جميع أنحاء فلسطين التاريخية. إنها الحل الوحيد. إنها أخلاقية وعادلة وقابلة للتحقيق.

لطالما جادل الكثيرون منا بأن فكرة "حل الدولتين" مجرد وهم، وذلك للأسباب المنطقية التي يمكنكم الاطلاع عليها في كتابي الصادر عام ٢٠٠٤ بعنوان "مشاركة أرض كنعان" (متوفر هنا: https://qumsiyeh.org/sharingthelandofcanaan/). ولكن حتى أولئك الذين أيدوا فكرة الدولتين بنوايا حسنة أدركوا الآن الطبيعة الجوهرية للصهيونية: التوسع الاستعماري (الذي يشمل الآن لبنان وسوريا أيضاً)، والمستوطنات، والضم، وتفتيت المجتمعات الفلسطينية، والقوانين التمييزية، والوحشية العسكرية، والمذابح، والإبادة الجماعية والتطهير العرقي. لعقود طويلة، كانت لدينا دولة واحدة تمتد من النهر إلى البحر، يحكمها نظام فصل عنصري. لا ينبغي لنا الاستمرار في السعي وراء صيغة سياسية وهمية لا تتوافق مع الواقع. بدلاً من ذلك، يجب أن نعمل من أجل مستقبل يتوافق مع الحقيقة والواقع.

البديل ليس صراعاً لا نهاية له، بل دولة ديمقراطية واحدة تقوم على المساواة أمام القانون، والمواطنة المتساوية بغض النظر عن الدين أو العرق، والحماية الدستورية لجميع المجتمعات، والاحترام الكامل للقانون الدولي وحقوق الإنسان العالمية. ستعترف دولة كهذه بكرامة وأمن جميع الناس بغض النظر عن دينهم (أو عدمه)، مع معالجة المظالم التاريخية من خلال الحقيقة والمساءلة والتعويض والمصالحة وتطبيق الحقوق المعترف بها دوليًا، بما في ذلك حقوق اللاجئين الفلسطينيين. هذا عالم ما بعد الصهيونية (ما بعد الاستعمار)، وهو السبيل الوحيد لتجنب حرب عالمية كارثية تدمر حضارتنا.

نتعلم من التاريخ أن نحو 170 دولة وصلت إلى مرحلة ما بعد الاستعمار، حيث يتقاسم أحفاد المستعمرين وأحفاد المستعمرون الوطن. نتعلم أن الصراعات الاستعمارية نادرًا ما تنتهي بسيناريوهات كتلك التي شهدتها الجزائر (رحيل أحفاد المستعمرين) أو الولايات المتحدة وأستراليا (الإبادة الجماعية واسعة النطاق). كما نرى أمثلة عديدة لمجتمعات تغلبت على أنظمة التمييز والعنصرية المتجذرة. يُعد انتقال جنوب أفريقيا من نظام الفصل العنصري مثالًا على ذلك، مع العلم أن على كل مجتمع أن يجد طريقه الخاص. لا يُبنى السلام الدائم بفصل الشعوب خلف الجدران أو في معسكرات الاعتقال (كما يحدث هنا)، بل بضمان المساواة في الحقوق، والمؤسسات المشتركة، والاحترام المتبادل.

ترفض هذه الرؤية الهيمنة بكل أشكالها، وتؤكد أنه لا يمكن لأحد أن يحقق الحرية الدائمة بحرمان الآخر من حريته. إننا جميعًا مُقدَّر لنا أن نتقاسم هذه الأرض. والسؤال الحقيقي هو: هل سنفعل ذلك في ظل نظام هيمنة، أم في مجتمع ديمقراطي؟ أمامنا الآن فرصة ومسؤولية للمساهمة في صياغة هذا المستقبل. بدلًا من الدفاع عن صيغ دبلوماسية غير واقعية، علينا بناء حركة واسعة النطاق تقوم على مبادئ واضحة:

المساواة لكل إنسان.

إنهاء التمييز وأنظمة الامتياز العرقي أو الديني.

التطبيق الكامل للقانون الدولي وحقوق الإنسان.

العدالة للاجئين وجميع ضحايا النزوح.

حكم ديمقراطي يوفر حماية دستورية للجميع.

مصالحة قائمة على الحقيقة والمساءلة (معاقبة للمسؤولين عن الجرائم والإبادة) والعدالة والإنسانية المشتركة.

هذا ليس مجرد طموح مثالي. إنه الحل الديمقراطي الواقعي الوحيد والقابل للتحقيق. كل عام يمر دونه يُعمّق الظلم ويُصعّب المصالحة في المستقبل، بينما يدفع العالم إلى حافة الكارثة (كما نرى الآن في الحرب الإسرائيلية/الأمريكية غير الشرعية على إيران ودول أخرى لخدمة مصالح صهيونية مُتصوّرة). الحركات تُغيّر التاريخ. تبدأ هذه الحركات بأناس عاديين يرفضون قبول الظلم أو المسيرة العمياء نحو نهاية العالم كأمر حتمي، ويتكاتفون حول رؤية أخلاقية عادلة ومُلهمة. تتطلب حملة الدولة الديمقراطية الواحدة

مشاركة المعلمين والطلاب والفنانين والجماعات الدينية والنقابات العمالية والأكاديميين وعلماء القانون والعاملين في المجال الصحي

والناشطين البيئيين وكل من يؤمن بالعدالة.

ندعوكم للانضمام إلينا في بناء هذه الحركة. لنستبدل اليأس بالأمل، والإقصاء بالمساواة. لنعمل معًا لكي ينشأ كل طفل يولد بين نهر الأردن والبحر الأبيض المتوسط، أو يولد في الشتات، بكرامة وسلام وعدالة. المستقبل ليس للانفصال والهيمنة، بل للديمقراطية والمساواة وإنسانيتنا المشتركة. انضموا إلى حملة المقاطعة وسحب الاستثمارات وفرض العقوبات (BDS) (http://bdsmovement.net) وحملة الدولة الديمقراطية الواحدة (https://onestatecampaign.org). اقرأوا، ناقشوا، نظموا، ثقفوا، وساعدوا في بناء الحركة الدولية الواسعة التي تتطلبها هذه اللحظة التاريخية.

حان الوقت الآن.

أ.د. مازن قمصية

أنظر أيضا حلمٌ يستحق أن يُرى: لنتخيّل فلسطين المستقبل 

https://bit.ly/4ftv6gu

Curse of the intellectual

There is a curse for a thinking person . It is a double curse if that thinking person is also afflicted with the (some would say naive) idea that he/she can help the world to a better future (less suffering, peace, sustainability etc). The activist addiction to work is the believe that he/she can change cirumstances and that working towards sustainable human and natural communities is a duty (sustainable planet). Yet, it is difficult to keep consistent positive attitude knowing how close we are to an unlivable planet due to climate change, habitat destruction, pollution, overexploitation of resources, invasive species. This is the curse of knowledge. This is not to mention how close we are to a catastrophic global war: the US alone, the most warring nation on earth, has enough weapons to destroy humanity and is about to increase its war chest spending to $1.5 Trillion per year. In the interim, the rich get richer and the poor get poorer. For me personally, the detailed knowledge and data I read on these matters (thousands of books and tens of thousands of articles just in the past 5 years) can be overwhelming.

How do we reconcile facts of genocide, ecocide, scholasticide, medicide, veriticide and indeed omnicide in the 21st century? The apathy of millions and the collusion of governments under lobbies? The relentless public relations lies and distortions dehumanizing victims and blaming them for their own misery. The easier availability of data for example via Aritficial Intelligence/Machine Learning (with all its faults) can compound the challenge for the thinking mind. Part of the problem for us scientists is that we understand a bit about the human evolution and human frailty. People are driven by their background and upbringing including their biases, blind spots, and misdirected energy. That is why we admire people who manage to break away from damaging ideas like ideas o chosenness, racism, Zionism, colonialism, capitalistic greed and more. We read the writings of such brave souls looking for clues as to how and why they managed to break free of the chains and bonds their society imposed on their brains. We also wonder if things are predestined to work as they have worked historically rather than our wishful thinking and actions. For example was it inevitable that some Jews moved towards humanism and some moved towards Zionism (and why the difference). Similarly, is it inevitable that some Muslims moved towards Islamism while other to humanism. Were Nazism, Capitalism, Crusaderism and Christian Nationalism inevitable human phenomena? And if we academic and intellectual activists arrive at certain logical conclusions about what is good for peace and sustainability, then how do we advocate for it? For example, 50 years of knowledge a belief I had that religiousity (not religion), fundamentalism, and extremism are harmful to peace and coexistance. I wrote a book called "Sharing the Land of Canaan" published 2004. But how do you convince secular Israelis and secular Palestinians that their interests are to work together against Zionism and fundamentalism and towards one democratic state? And if we are unable to convince those, what hope is there for changing the fundamentalists? I with interns/volunteers wrote many research papers, some of them are relevant to this: for example we wrote papers on liberation from mental colonization (both for the oppressor population as well as the oppressed/occupied people). Some read and few change. And sometimes change is regressive: for example more and more people in Western Asia/our region have moved towards irrational religiosity and away from logic. It is not difficult also to see how Zionism and colonialism engendered religious fundamentalism. 

But what are the tools of activism: confronting oppressor, building, love? We struggle of how to organize, how to write, how to convince people of what is good for them and for the planet. We each come to somewhat different conclusions about best ways to act. 22 years ago, my writing on this subject was a bit more confident (see for example https://qumsiyeh.org/chapter13/). Now in my older age, I am a bit more reflective and a bit less sure humans can be rational or can have that better future. What changed me was not just age but also seeing first hand the unimaginable horrors of the last three years. I tried to share some examples.

Pending better answers, I personally split my time now roughly 60% to building institutions that serve human and natural communities (our Palestine Institute for Biodiversity and Sustainability palestinenature.org among other ways to support people and nature) and 40% to challenging systems of oppression. To do both areas requires digesting a lot of sad information and many of my readers (55,000 people) comment on how I find time to gather all the links and info for the posts I have been sending (about two a week for the past 30 years). It is overwhelming (volunteering 15 hours a day, seven days a week, no time-off). They ask how I keep my sanity considering this knowledge. The answer is that I am neither sane nor adjusted to the volume of work I must do. But the children here around us and the daily contact with friends in Gaza and around the world among many things push us forward even when the old body demands some sleep time or the mind demands at least some time to digest and plan better. The urgency of the situation drives us. No perfect answers or good "solutions" but a drive to press on.

From a friend's post
"The lack of food in G@S@ is now critical. Starvation has begun in areas. Remember, now 60% of G@S@ has shrunk and the land stolen. This is what colonialism looks like. Absolutely NO regard for human life and suffering.
https://youtu.be/eLsX-fGVM1E
https://youtu.be/ZAufRb0doTo
Here’s Bisan Owda on life in G@S@, but this is at least a week old. 

One of five events I participated in for Nakba Day remembrance https://youtu.be/lDjU89H914c 

The flotilla activists have been returned to the West, and the stories they’re telling about what they endured in only 48 hours are shocking.

https://youtu.be/51TEplx-YMc

https://youtu.be/DrhBL4YkvWQ

Even sexual assault! 

https://youtu.be/GjRwBcbuubU 

A commentary on western "civilization"

https://youtu.be/3voCDAzE-N8

https://youtu.be/R3QSVGKMHOc 

Albanese interviewed by Miko Peled: link

Inspiring people

The resilience of people is inspiring. Please watch these five short videos and be energized
Video 1 Video 2 Video 3 Video 4 Video 5

 Illegal Siege, Brutal Abuse: Detention and Assault at the Hands of Israeli apartheid soldiers of the Gaza Freedom flotilla 

Rare film now available 'Children of Shatila' - 1998
Not far from Shatila, a story of a paramedic (one of thousands from the ongoing genocide but this one especially touched me)

Not just genocide, ecocide, and medicide in Palestine but also Veriticide!! World Press Freedom Day. 308 Palestinian journalists in Gaza have been killed by Israel since October 7, 2023, making this the deadliest war for media workers in history. #WorldPress Know the names of all of the journalists who worked to bring us the truth of the genocide in Gaza.

Israeli mossad behind (failed) riots in Iran
[The number killed both among the rioters. among police, and the uninvolved civilians shot by rioters were tallied by Iran's health ministry which challenged the Western media and politicians to provide names of any of the ones the west claimed were killed in their 10 fold exaggerated numbers]

This is the indoctrination that allows people to label us as anti-Semites for seeing Jews as equal (not special entitled to impunity and committing genocide)

Prof. Jiang's useful analysis 

Zionists staging fake "antisemitic attacks" - Caitlin Johnstone

Head of the Israel Academy of Sciences and humanities tells it like it is 
Ex-Mossad Chief 'Ashamed to Be a Jew' in light of atrocities against Palestinians here in the West Bank (I faced this myself)

Israeli soldiers engaging in genocide and committing suicide

March to karbala (see the religious devotion and sacrifice that explains things from one sector of the Iranian society)

Love

New paper published
Qumsiyeh, M. B., & Bibee, A. (2026). The nexus of environmental justice and potential for sustainable tourism under colonial occupation in Palestine. Pp 167-185 In F. Higgins Desbiolle et al (Eds.), Climate Justice in Tourism. Channel View Publications, Bristol, Jackson.

"Love without courage and wisdom is sentimentality, as with the ordinary church member. Courage without love and wisdom is foolhardiness, as with the ordinary soldier. Wisdom without love and courage is cowardice, as with the ordinary intellectual. Therefore one who has love, courage and wisdom is one in a million who moves the world, as with Jesus, Buddha and Gandhi." Ammon Hennacy, The One-Man Revolution

The genocidal war on the people of Western Asia is about money and resources (as all wars are) in tis case to control global oil and gas and make you dependent on those (also by killing alternative energy options).

The genocide in Gaza is being replicated in Lebanon and Gaza Grieves More Children Killed by Israel
while Defense of Children International forced to close by Israeli apartheid authorities. The UN issued report on Israeli systematic violations of human rights.

Global Sumud Flotilla is sailing to break the genocidal siege on Gaza. Follow on this tracker 

From a Jewish friend: "Kevin Warsh was nominated by Trump to replace Jerome Powell as Chairman of the Federal Reserve Board of Governors. It came to light yesterday that not only is this man with disclosed financial assets worth between 131 and 209 million dollars but that Forbes estimates his wife’s net worth at 1.9 billion dollars! Who is Warsh’s wife? The granddaughter of Estee Lauder and the daughter of Ron Lauder, President of the World Jewish Congress, one of the world’s principal Zionist organizations promoting Israeli apartheid. Some people believe that this billion dollar power couple (Kevin & Jane) already have too much influence over the American government and the promotion of their Zionist objectives that include restrictions on free speech using the legal system to intimidate those who speak out on behalf of Palestinian rights and an end to Israeli apartheid."

A brilliant rapper from Gaza.

Analysis
Medhurst explains the economics of war
and Prof Jiang explains the connectivity to Israel well
Abby Martin on the rogue state than needs to be isolated 
Max Blumenthal also on Israel's connections 
Pro-Israel ‘Thinktanks’ and Individuals who shape U.S. Foreign Policy
The lego style videos coming out of Iran have been going viral to explain US hegemony done for Israel and the billionaires. Here is an example

Some people who defend nature pay a heavy price