samuelhayimbrody.bsky.social
religious studies professor in Kansas. modern Jewish thought (philosophy, theology, politics, economics, interfaith).
new yorker by birth, father of two kansan children by the grace of god.
union guy.
אֱהֹב אֶת הַמְּלָאכָה, וּשְׂנָא אֶת הָרַבָּנוּת, וְאַל תִּתְוַדַּע לָרָשׁוּת:
2,557 posts
3,121 followers
2,290 following
Regular Contributor
Active Commenter
comment in response to
post
Indeed
comment in response to
post
It’s the beltway version of this:
comment in response to
post
he did the meme
comment in response to
post
it’s not the policy necessarily, it’s the fighting spirit. normie dems hate republicans and they don’t understand why their reps act like they are wrong to do that
comment in response to
post
oh, these people think they can just show their faces? in public?
comment in response to
post
these people cannot stop committing crimes.
comment in response to
post
nothing they say in private matters AT ALL. only what they do in public matters. journalists need to stop amplifying this to feed our desire to see dissent. private conversations are not dissent
comment in response to
post
Thanks. I’ll just say that I wasn’t remotely attempting to exhaust that complex topic. The point was only to neutralize Kirsch’s pearl-clutching about the very idea, by showing that civil rights and sovereignty are not the same thing.
comment in response to
post
ahhh you are probably thinking of “hitlergrusse” when I was thinking of “sieg heil”
comment in response to
post
It’s pretty telling since they are a fringe far-right splinter church to begin with
comment in response to
post
Calvin Robinson www.theguardian.com/us-news/2025...
comment in response to
post
it could even consist of merely two German words
comment in response to
post
two words: “sieg heil.”
not “a provocative gesture that resembled the controversial salute Elon Musk gave.”
you cowards
comment in response to
post
Ahh I see what you mean. The lack of slack is mainly due to my perception that he is arguing in bad faith in many places rather than engaging seriously and honestly. If you, for example, wrote a full article saying what you just said here, I would be far more sympathetic.
comment in response to
post
100% agreed. I didn’t try to make this “settler-colonialism 101” - there’s basically no detailed description and contrast of the cases - and that is one among the several reasons why
comment in response to
post
Yeah that was drew me to the CRT comparison. The fact that the truth of the arguments takes a complete backseat to the perceived *danger* of the arguments.
comment in response to
post
…mainly to say that not everyone in the larger field necessarily draws on the exact vocabulary or conversations going on in the smaller one, but that doesn’t mean they somehow disavow the discourse. But it was kind of an “academic” point
comment in response to
post
I don’t think you’re being an ass, and appreciate correction. You might try writing a letter to BR, if they print those?
I had a paragraph that was cut looking at the relationships between “CRT” and AAS in the U.S., on the one hand, and “settler-colonialism studies” and IS on the other…
comment in response to
post
activism precedes them both, and if I had more space I would have completed the circle by showing how the academic fields only draw upon and complete theorization that was already developed by activists. but alas
comment in response to
post
as* ugh
comment in response to
post
The paradigm works without active armed conflict; what matters is that the settlers become the masters politically. (In Israel there is in fact armed conflict with Britain, which is in my opinion mistakenly held up as a counter when in fact it just aligns with the U.S. model.)
comment in response to
post
Both processes happen at the same time. The metropole is interested in extraction; the settlers develop a separate interest which eventually leads them to seek independent power.
comment in response to
post
This isn’t *my* case. The contrast is very simple: the British colonies are regular colonialism, the metropole is Britain. The settler revolt occurs partly *because* the British made treaties with native nations that inhibited settler expansion. The cycle then repeats under the U.S.
comment in response to
post
I don’t think the lines can be drawn so cleanly. The post-imperial lines drawn after WWI, the birth of so many nation-states, were a product of European diplomats working with “Wilsonian” ideas. Wilson was an adult well before Wounded Knee. Ideas traverse oceans fairly easily in the 20th century.
comment in response to
post
Thanks, much appreciate the engagement
comment in response to
post
Thanks! Genuinely appreciate the engagement especially from someone to my right politically
comment in response to
post
That *could* be an interesting academic conversation, like discussing the difference between the French/Spanish/Dutch vs. British in North America, but Kirsch’s argument is that the whole category is nothing but genocidal white guilt political theology, so I address him at his level
comment in response to
post
you’re so good at writing poetry, have you considered writing more poetry
comment in response to
post
you should resign
comment in response to
post
thanks, carl!
comment in response to
post
well, i of course love this
comment in response to
post
thanks!
comment in response to
post
Thank you! Means a lot coming from you
comment in response to
post
thanks ben!
comment in response to
post
The answers, of course, are all nefarious: naive students manipulated by crafty professors and genocidal terrorist movements, and of course, antisemitism.
The idea that people criticize settler-colonialism because it is real and harmful? No.
My modest alternative proposal: taking it seriously.