I have what to me is an uncomfortable question to ask, as it relates to how I think about those who live on the land some call Palestine.

I know many who are descendants of New France and other French colonists who consider themselves to be victims of British Colonialism.


Some other terms that have been used to refer to all or part of the land some call Palestine include Canaan, Land of Israel, the Promised Land, Greater Syria, the Holy Land, Iudaea Province, Judea, Coele-Syria, "Israel HaShlema", Kingdom of Israel, Kingdom of Jerusalem, Zion, Retenu (Ancient Egyptian), Southern Syria, Southern Levant and Syria Palaestina.

Each of these names tells a slightly different story about the land and what relationships exist with which peoples. Depending on which story you are focused on, there were different partitions of lands between different groups who wanted exclusive control over a much larger region (Jordan, Sinai Peninsula, etc).

I don't believe that land should be seen as exclusive to any single of the wide variety of peoples whose origins can be seen in that land, whether they call themselves Jews, Christians, Muslims or have been called Arabs (with the wide variety of meanings of that term, depending on what story is being told with the word).

However, New France was merely another example of European Christian colonialism, and not something that grew out of this land. I see no legitimacy to any claims that they are Indigenous to this land, or that they are victims of Colonialism.

I don't find the terms "Jewish" or "Palestinian" clear enough to determine if we are talking about peoples like the member nations/peoples of the Haudenosaunee or Anishinaabe when talking about connections to this land -- or if we are talking about peoples like the Spanish, Portuguese, French, Dutch, Russia or other examples of clearly foreign European Christian colonialism?

I understand how the violent techniques that the Government of Israel uses against those who most recently lived there feel similar to those that the British North American settler-colonial governments (consolidated into USA and Canada) use – but is it actually a comparable situation?

I agree there should be a ceasefire, but I don’t know how clear it is to end sectarian violence that has been ongoing in a variety of ways for thousands of years.

Expand full comment