Introducing Translations

A lot of our conversations are closing space for empathy and care instead of opening new pathways for understanding. Much of that can be attributed to binary thinking and the refusal to engage with and translate the lived experiences of others. 

Translations is about breaking down binaries by practicing dialogue across differences. We are here to translate words that carry weight so they don’t end conversations, they open them up. Each episode will share stories, skills, and real conversations that show how people can stay in the room even when the tension is real. As we know, these differences are not going away. 

Subscribe wherever you get your podcasts, and please be sure to rate & review.

Visit our website: www.projectshema.org. 

Translations is a new initiative from Project Shema exploring how we can approach complex issues with nuance and empathy. Through conversations with leading academics, practitioners, and community voices, this podcast invites listeners to learn alongside us as we translate big questions into deeper understanding. http://projectshema.org/translations

Transcript

SPEAKER_00 0:00

Good afternoon, everyone. Thank you for joining us. My name is Kara Wilson. I'm the Chief Strategy Officer at Project Shema. Project Shema is a training and support organization that helps teams navigate conversations across differences. We focus on strengthening Jewish inclusion, belonging, and safety. And we found that when Jewish inclusion is strengthened, inclusion more broadly is strengthened as well. So our work is inspired by our namesake, Shema, the Hebrew word to hear or listen. Listening as a practice is at the heart of what we do. What we've learned is that most people don't want more debate. They want a way to engage across difference without causing harm or being misunderstood. But right now, many people feel like conversations about Israel and Palestine are nearly impossible. And we hope for a different future. We have to grapple with the basic truth. There is no path forward if people can't sit together, hear one another, and begin to humanize each other's experiences. And many of us haven't even seen Jews and Palestinians or Jews and Muslims engaging constructively across differences, especially after October 7th. Without those models, we can retreat into silence. And that's why we're here today. And now, if you've participated in our workshops, you know that we teach skills for navigating complexity. And today you'll get to see some of those skills in action. And with that, I'm actually going to invite my translation co-host, Eli, to share a few words about Project Shema's approach to these conversations.

SPEAKER_02 1:31

Thank you, Kara. My name is Eli Cohn Postel. I am the vice president of education and innovation at Project Shema, and I'm lucky to co-host the Translations podcast with Kara. I am very excited to have Hamza Awauda and Daniel Brawl with us today. Hamza and Daniel co-created a substack called The Higher Ground. And the guiding principle of the higher ground and the inspiration behind it is to be a platform where, as they describe it, values speak louder than sides, where destiny is chosen, not inherited. Their work is a powerful example of the importance of relationship building and especially of clarifying and verifying, which is a critical skill that we emphasize at Project Shema, clarify and verify. It's a skill that we've been teaching for as long as we've been offering training and a core part of our internal practice as an organization. Clarify and verify involves two steps, asking questions about something you don't understand, and repeating back someone's response to ensure a shared definition of key terms, ideas, or simply what they're trying to communicate. We do this because we often assume someone means one thing when they actually mean something entirely different, and this helps us move past binary thinking and polarized attitudes.

SPEAKER_00 2:36

Hold up, Eli, can you say more about binary thinking, please?

SPEAKER_02 2:39

Sure. So we have a really human habit of falling into binary thinking, which means that we can only see two answers or solutions to a problem. Everything becomes either good or bad, helpful or harmful, friend or foe.

SPEAKER_00 2:50

So what I think you're trying to name here is that we can lose track of the nuanced and very messy middle that makes up most people's experiences. Is that right?

SPEAKER_02 2:58

That is exactly right. And also a great example of what it looks like to clarify and verify in real time. So binary thinking makes it hard to appreciate someone's full humanity and the complexity we all carry. Among other reasons, I'm happy to see Daniel and Hamza model this with us today.

SPEAKER_00 3:12

Okay, so Daniel and Hamza recently described conversations about Israel and Palestine as quicksand, where the desire to be right as opposed to building understanding pulls us deeper into argument and further away from common ground.

SPEAKER_02 3:27

Their work in different ways asks what becomes possible if we shift from defending positions to actually trying to understand one another. So you both come to this work not only as collaborators, but from deeply personal and historically rooted identities. Daniel, you're a first-generation Jewish Iranian American writer focused on Israel and Palestine and the American Jewish experience. Hamza, you are a Palestinian writer and peace builder, and the founder of the Center for Palestinian Renewal.

SPEAKER_00 3:52

And today's conversation and discussion is grounded very much in personal experience. Both Daniel and Hamza are speaking in their individual and personal capacity. And I want to be especially clear that while Daniel is on staff and we love him, he's here today as his individual voice. So his views shouldn't be interpreted as representing Project Shema, the broader Jewish community or Iranian Jews as a whole. And the same is true for Hamza. He'll openly share his own lived experiences, perspectives, and not speaking on behalf of all Palestinians broadly or any larger community. And we've asked both of them to share nuanced and empathetic perspectives. And with all of that said, some moments may feel uncomfortable, but that discomfort is actually part of engaging meaningfully across differences. So we thank you for sitting in that with us and we're excited to get into our conversation. So first off, thank you, both of you. One of the central ideas behind translations is that we're not just sharing perspectives, we're constantly translating between worlds that rarely line up neatly. Um, and so to that idea, I'm wondering like what worlds uh you come from. Daniel, if you wanna, if you want to go first.

SPEAKER_03 4:58

Yeah, first of all, I want to say hi, everybody. Um, and to those of you who are tuning in, thank you for being here. I want to apologize in advance to the people who have heard me share my story before. I remember Kamala Harris calls this message discipline. So I'm gonna take some solace in that. But to tell you my story, I really have to start several decades back with my family. You know, my family lived as ordinary grains of sand until the forces of history interrupted and really turned their story into another non-consensual parable of Jewish flight. They were born in Iran, they love their country, they even serve their country. My grandfather, who I talk so much about, his name was Musa. He served as the Jewish member of parliament in pre-revolutionary Iran at the time, due to restrictive quotas, the representative to Iran's entire Jewish community. And even despite uh the burden of that responsibility, you know, he refused to be constrained by the limits placed on him because of his identity. He championed religious equality. So he successfully changed the law that required all members of parliament to take their oath of office on the Quran to open the door for each to swear on their own sacred text. And the Shah rewarded his service with the royal medal. But of course, you know, as Jews, they knew their place, right? They understood that being Jewish came with imposed terms and conditions, some 2,700 years of planted roots in Iran, notwithstanding. And you know, as Jews, we know that's because the Jewish history of flight really instills in our subconscious mind the understanding that we could plant roots and tend to them, but our lot is really likely a lease that doesn't guarantee permanence. And the Islamic Revolution lent those terms further credence, right? So for me growing up, I really held my family's pain and my grandfather's royal medal as inheritances. Both became symbols of the possible for me. You know, their pain on one hand taught me to see the world as it is, and his medal taught me to see the world as it could be. And its synergy really gave me the conviction that Muslim Jewish coexistence lies within the realm of possibility, even though I'm not naive about its challenges, especially today. So I chose the path of peace, even though for as long as I've lived, the three pillars of my identity, Iranian, American, Jew, uh, have known anything but peace between them, and now they're at literal war. And so that's why I'm here today.

SPEAKER_00 7:32

Thank you, Daniel. I think that was really powerful. Um, how you're walking around with generational trauma and how that can actually inspire the work that you're doing. So thank you. Hamza, what about you?

SPEAKER_01 7:43

Hi, everyone. I'm uh happy to be with you today. Um, I come from a different world in every sense. Um, I was born in born in Palestine in the southwest of uh the West Bank in a town that's not uh very small, but it's still not a big city called Dura. I come from a traditional family, uh part of a larger tribe. We live within the extended family as one family, especially in the absence of governments and institutions. These old institutions served as keeping the social economic uh situation of the tribes very well. My grandfather was among the first who created armed um fight against Israel early on after the 1948 Nakba because he lost his land in Nakba and as a man from Dura, he fought uh against that. This was his paradigm of conflict. But um, you know, stories become national and become um part of larger stories. So I I came to life as a grandchild of uh this heroic man, kind of a pioneer, kind of a first um volunteers to fight. But as a child, I was scared mainly, scared from everything going on, and I I didn't see how this fight can be the best solution. Like the the problems are there, but um you know, even though my grandfather was killed by Israel eventually, his children were fighters. I mean, they were not killed, they were prisons, but like this did not finish anything, so the concept in its own sense did not make sense to me. But the alternative is where philosophy and where discussions and where things can get really messy and manipulated and difficult. I I lived all my life trying to figure this out. So I had a computer early on and internet, and I was reading a lot about uh Israel Zionism, the West liberalism, trying to, especially with the war in Iraq, I was a teenager and kind of seeing America destroying an Arab capital. Um this all was provoking me to learn, study, and I did not go to the critical voices, I went to mainstream because I wanted to understand what the mainstream uh feel. And it's still a minister uh mystery, but I think this is where the holy work exists, and um and it's difficult work, it's a work that doesn't reward you immediately. It's uh um it is the harder alternative to violence, and it's not easy. I I try with friends like Daniel who don't fear the experiment, and even though it doesn't come with easy uh experience always, to figure this out for the current crisis and for the future generation. And I come from the assumption that we don't have leaders who care about us. So we are on our own, either we fix our life or we don't.

SPEAKER_00 10:40

I think that's really inspiring part of what you're saying, like the the power of words, like wanting to seek a different way, a different path. So you two met after October 7th at a time of deep division, fear, and now as tensions in the region continue to escalate, including the current conflict now involving the US and Iran, the stakes of these conversations can feel really high. And I'm just wondering if you can tell us how you came together, what allowed you to build a relationship in a moment like that? Like, how did this actually come to be?

SPEAKER_03 11:12

You know, I actually, it's funny because I think you can describe this as kind of a modern digital love story where Hamza messaged me on Twitter where I'm fairly active. And I didn't know who he was at the time, but we developed a relationship shortly thereafter. And I remember Hamza came to Los Angeles to do a presentation at UCLA, and I was frankly blown away, right? And I I think I I can acknowledge my own prejudices here, where you know, you never, especially in a time of war, you don't know what strain of voice you're gonna get. Like, is this gonna be somebody who's really strident and it's gonna be hard to listen to this person, or somebody that's more conciliatory and is really bringing people into attempt. And Hamza felt uh fell kind of into the latter category for me. And I, you know, I really resonated with everything he was saying. Although we come from different worlds, we have so much in common in terms of you know, approach to dialogue and also strains from family, right? Like how our own voice um isn't always welcome and or embraced with open arms by the people that we love dearly. And I remember he was talking so much about you need to be in conversation, especially with family members that you are struggling with. And so we, I think we bonded over that and um, you know, we kept in communication and tried to figure out ways that we could really work together. And that's what gave birth to I think our Substack and the work ever since.

SPEAKER_01 12:37

And if I may add, um, before October 7th, all my uh uh my energy and the peace building was in two tracks. One that was talking to decision makers. So me and my colleagues were talking to the Israeli officials, to the Palestinian officials, to the EU officials, to the Congress, to the State Department, White House, because we thought if we show them that this is the best option with science and with evidence, that they're gonna just do it because why would they make mistakes and miscalculations when we have now tools and knowledge? And also working with young people in on the ground in Israel and Palestine. So after October 7th, I lost confidence on that higher level, and I think we are not always their main concern. And uh working with young people on the ground became also um impossible due to the circumstances on the ground. So I shifted, I I I all of a sudden have seen that uh even though me and Daniel don't have any immediate power on the reality, but what we can do now with um hopefully others who do their own share of this work can lay the ground and keep the message alive on behalf of the people interest, not power. Uh because um frankly, this is what we have control on. After many years, me trying, you know, to have a shortcut to power, it was not a good strategy in my view. And what we were able to achieve within this short time, a lot of new messages, a lot of work that usually organizations, you know, have a lot of stuff and energy and planning to do it, we did spontaneously, truly, and that's why it worked and resonated with the with many people.

SPEAKER_00 14:20

Um I'm wondering because you brought up the idea of what you were doing before 10-7. And I'm just wondering, like, do you think this relationship would have been possible? Do you think it would have been as powerful before, or was there actually something about that moment that made this type of connection and collaboration more necessary, maybe, or or even more possible?

SPEAKER_01 14:40

I think October 7th changed me. Uh, before October 7th, my understanding of uh of this game was if we make the right plan and if we are smart enough, we will push everyone into sanity and peace and stability and everything. On October 7th, I started to see peace not as a transactional thing, not because uh, you know, if we do this, we uh this will happen and all this rational thing, because um we don't have control on that. And um I started to see the personal aspect, the romantic aspect, the um that we are all in the same struggle as people, end of the day, no matter which side you are, suffering is there. Um and uh I changed, I started to value this personal thing more than the things that sounded more important in the past. Like uh in the past I would you know go to a meeting just because it's fancy over you know talking to a group of people because these people have no power. Nowadays I would not. I will I will like say this member of Congress doesn't lack views and knowledge and um probably will not care much more than think sorry for me, but if I speak with Daniel, that's a friend also, you know, like this world is going through so much. I can despite our differences or not differences, the relationship is on the human level. Because we trust our values and it's normal we see things differently. That's actually us being truthful and normal.

SPEAKER_03 16:04

I think I would add to that and to take your words, Kara. Definitely possible, but not as powerful. You know, I I think after October 7th, I became more desperate. I think where more people were becoming intolerant, I felt I needed to display more tolerance in terms of my ability to withstand partial criticism or understand the deep pressures that are happening. I saw it as a moment of desperation that we really needed to shelve whatever trivial differences that we had in order to build partnerships that could graduate into political change. And so we as a community, and I think we are even deeper in that uh after this war, have have been in rock bottom, honestly, if you will. So, you know, Hamza and I were set out to create a permission structure for people to be able to work with people that they otherwise wouldn't agree with on every single point. And I always make an emphasis to say that there is no such thing as 100% ideological alignment on any issue, let alone the Israeli-Palestinian conflict. So why not do like disabuse ourselves of that illusion and work with people who have an ultimate shared end goal?

SPEAKER_00 17:11

Yeah, I think, well, you're naming something really important, right? Like there is a moment where there's many who escape to these ideological bubbles. And that's why I think what you're doing, what you're both doing is really so inspiring because it's hard. And I want to push on that a little bit. Like I'm I'm very curious around you're both brilliant writers and you don't agree on everything, and yet you're navigating a shared platform, like your Substack. And so can you bring us into the realities of that, especially as you're metabolizing the realities of Israel and Palestine, the broader escalation in the Middle East? Like, how does this, how does this work for you both?

SPEAKER_03 17:47

Well, you know, I think the foundation is one of trust. And so we're not really watching over what each one of us are saying and doing. We understand that we have a baseline level of understanding and shared values. And so each one of us comes up with our own respective pieces that we are working with, or as we've done in the past, writing shared articles. And you know, if it's something that we individually write, then we'll kind of alert one another. You know, I wrote something, I'm thinking of publishing it on our Substack, take a look. What do you think? Otherwise, I think our process is really pretty simple in that vein.

SPEAKER_01 18:21

Yeah, and also, you know, um when we when we write, I sometimes send something to Daniel and then I change my mind. I don't want to publish it. Because like it's also like a mirror, also, because we're similar age, uh, similar generation, sometimes um it's just a good mirror. Uh, you you get your beasts to have less weaknesses. So I don't when I read something for Daniel, I don't try to change his message because this is his his message, his unique message. I'm not here to judge it, but if there's some obvious human errors in there, and um we know that we will not do like uh the 100% perfect thing, so we don't overthink it because sometimes very good things get published late or not ever published because uh we waste too much time on this very small percentage that we want to perfect. I think there's a lot of lack of original ideas and and um views that's worth to publish, even you know, none of us is uh doing this full-time and and as a profession as a it's it's it's as a hobby, it's as a gift from us to us, to ourselves, to the world. So with this energy, I think it has been very smooth. It didn't feel like even and it was inspired by moments also, always like either conversations we had or realities that changed, like incidents that happened.

SPEAKER_03 19:42

If I can just quickly add something to that, I think also what makes uh each one of us unique, but also how we work so well together is that many of our pieces are really a conversation to our own communities, right? Like I am often writing and my audience is often my people, right? Because it's it's so easy for, and I think I would say the same for Hamze, I think because we both operate from the understanding that it's so easy to point the finger, and that rarely gets you any credit, but it's so much harder to get your own house in order. And I need to get my own house in order before I'm going to, you know, uh lecture somebody else on what they're not doing right.

SPEAKER_00 20:20

What you both naming is really powerful, both writing as reflection for your own ideas, and then how that can also be a powerful reflection for your communities too. So I think just thank you for offering that. I think it's a really powerful way that writing can really change. Eli audience question, yes?

SPEAKER_02 20:35

Yeah, well, so I was just gonna say there's a question, and I think this is probably where we're going anyways, but there's a question here about actual examples of disagreement between Daniel and Hamza and like what that looks like and how that gets processed. So I don't know, Kara, if you want to, if there's like a particular direction you think there or how you want to take that.

SPEAKER_00 20:52

Well, I can take us in. I mean, I think Hamza, you've been critical in some of your writing around liberal Zionism and suggesting that even when framed as peace-oriented, it can still reinforce some structures that are harmful. And I'm just wondering if you'll I know that was a disagreement between the two of you. So if you want to talk more about it, what you meant in that early writing, and then Daniel, really curious how you process that, the ways in which that conversation unfolded as a specific example of disagreement.

SPEAKER_01 21:18

Yeah, that's a good question. So when I come from Palestine, I come from uh reality, for example, that uh didn't never knew national state or parties or organizing in the Western sense. And we come more from uh you know individual responsibility, collaboration. Um, I was one of eight siblings, we were all different. We were all different. So the coexistence was a coexistence among the difference. So I have a brother who's a lawyer, and uh one who's a businessman, one uh who's a construction worker. So obviously, in every take on anything that happens in our life, we come from our own uh hearts and angles. And backgrounds. And you know, we did criticize each other. We did, you know, say what we think. But it was never uh sound like a judgment, sound like uh passing feedback. You either it either open your eye on something or it doesn't. But like it's never important anyway. Like everyone says whatever they want, like no one takes it personally. And uh I worked all my life. Uh so when I started my peace building, I was uh 17th and I was lucky enough to work with uh Shaman Peres and Uri Sevir, and on the Palestinian side with the leaders and negotiators of Oslo. So the liberal Israelis and Palestinians, the liberal Zionists and the liberal Palestinians. And uh I worked all my life with them, uh served them, uh served their um strategies, um working with young people and getting to create a constituency for peace. But what I found over the years, that this class of Palestinians and Israelis, the liberal class, is detached from reality, is more a dreamer, is more um wishful thinking, is more um sure that their paradigm, which belongs to more of the Western societies, and we have cultural differences. The humanity is once is the same, but we we have differences on some part of our existence, and we don't subscribe to this. And over the years it became alive because of uh the overall global liberalism wants this liberal local liberal Israeli and Palestinians to succeed, so they support them, highlight their importance and their achievements in an exaggerated way when their uh share on the political map is uh declining fast and um and they lack any answer to the reality. All what they're doing is so this was from my experience, and for me was if the liberals are liberals, they will never be angry about architecism because what makes liberal liberals that they encourage architecture, they encourage so I was okay, I'm gonna criticize them because this is what I feel now. Maybe in the future my mind will be different and I allow myself to think differently as I experience different things in life. But this is a test for the liberal voices. Are they gonna say, well, we are liberal, we don't care, like we are we never take it personally when we are criticized, or it will also expose them. And it's part of uh fair political games that uh we can all practice and try to prove what actually can solve our problems or not in these manners because it challenged them, challenged me, over um just you know uh doing something destructive or mean or unfair uh to prove my point.

SPEAKER_00 24:37

I think that's it. Well, what I was gonna just name in what you said is there's ways in which like criticism can actually be a high form of care and pushing the conversation forward in that in that way.

SPEAKER_01 24:47

That was another point. If I care about money, I know what to tell uh all the liberals to be happy about me and help me and give me what they want. But uh seriously, seriously, and and so with old wisdom. If you don't care about your friend uh benefit, if he's really your friend, you tell them, listen, if you take the sick and drink and drive, you're an idiot. I know this is awful thing to tell a friend, but actually you you can't cheat your friend. But if your friend is not really your friend, somebody of benefit, you say, man, take the the rest of the bottle, you know, be happy, because yeah, that it gives you immediate coolness in the eye of your friend, but you're you're harming your friend and you're selfish.

SPEAKER_00 25:25

Daniel, what were we gonna share?

SPEAKER_03 25:27

Well, to the whole dynamic about his piece, liberal Zionism, his wholesale critique of it, and my identity as a liberal Zionist. You know, I thought about it. And if I'm going to walk around preaching dialogue in spite of disagreement, right? Like I have intellectual honesty would demand that I give him that space. And it's not my space to give, right? But to allow him to publish a piece on our subsect, I said go for it, right? Like, even though I may disagree with some of the underlying criticism, we need to start giving people space to challenge one another. Like, I don't want to be so rigid as to not allow Hamza to voice his opinions, even ones that I disagree with. That's the whole point of this dialogue. I can understand the frustration, especially when we find ourselves in a period of utter desperation and hopelessness, and you see people who should know better, right? And like I'm speaking about liberal Zionists myself here, who are still operating from this business as usual posture, like and won't stick their neck out for peace. And I share in that frustration, right? Because I feel like I'm sticking my neck out and taking risks where others aren't. And you know, maybe they believe that they're granted absolution just by virtue of having the liberal descriptor attached to their Zionism. And that's not true. And I think that's where Hums and I both agree. Where I diverge with the wholesale criticism of even liberal Zionism is that, you know, for me, I think it's worth taking a step back to clarify that some of Palestinians' strongest, most steadfast allies have been liberal Zionists, in my view. Liberal Zionist Jews have long constituted the backbone of the peace lobby. Have we succeeded? Of course not. Look at where we are today. So while we do deserve a lot of blame, I think today's reality is largely a consequence of the actions of the most committed anti-normalizers on both sides, right? Hamas and the Israeli right. And without liberal Zionists, I think anti-normalization absolutists would fill the void, right? They would eliminate the potential for any hope because there'd be no political constituency for peacemaking. And this is not really like an appeal for sympathy for liberal Zionism. I think it's just to clarify the landscape, right? So I would argue that liberal Zionism isn't the obstacle to peace, it could be one of the barriers. I think it's one of the forces still fighting to keep the door open.

SPEAKER_01 27:46

And this is part of our need for reform, because um maybe the like we want Netanyahu to go home. We want, I don't know, everyone to go home, but maybe also the leaders of the liberal Zionists, because they also come from a generation and from a political map that no longer exists. Majority of people are young in the region, including Israel. So uh maybe, yeah, maybe when we see what's the problem, why it's not the leading force in Israel, for example, maybe we need reform there also. So as many things as idea they are noble, but uh lawyers who are advocating for it are not ad are not um the right lawyers, for example. And we have the same conversation within Palestine. I mean, I wrote the performance has to end peace, which was more directed toward Palestinian uh elite, PA, but also civil society and everything, who also, you know, as ideas, they're amazing and they're noble and they're they're better than Hamas and the others, but they're they're more a shell than any effective actions and functions on the ground, and they deserve to be uh held accountable based on the results that they deliver. Because there's no shortage of leaders who and young people who want to serve, and they're filling the position and they're failing. And they belong to an era that so many people failed, and they should go home like everybody else, in my opinion. Like as the government should go home, the opposition should go home sometimes.

SPEAKER_00 29:10

And I think what you're both naming, you know, when we talk about like discomfort or what does it mean to actually grow, right? Like how discomfort and that pushback that you had with that piece specifically, but how that can actually lead us to a different place. And so, like how, again, like even though criticism is sometimes hard to sit with, to reflect on, to process, how it can actually push a conversation forward in a really meaningful way. And I think we talk about that a lot organizationally. Like, what does it mean to actually be a progressive? Sometimes it means you're losing, but you're at least trying to push the conversation forward. Yeah, Eli is not.

SPEAKER_02 29:42

That's literally what it means. I mean, like, you know, you're making progress against the status quo. You should expect it to be an uphill battle, right? Like definitionally.

SPEAKER_00 29:49

So, question outside of your relationship with each other. Um, I'm wondering, like, how do you stay in dialogue with someone who says something offensive or harmful to you? Do you have examples of where you two navigated this maybe individually, together, maybe leaned on each other to navigate a situation where you were harmed? Can you speak a little bit about that?

SPEAKER_01 30:10

Yeah, I'll start. So, you know, uh depends on the day. Sometimes we are in a really good mood and we don't get triggered easily, even though something uh legitimately provocative we don't get. So, you know, when you are in one when I am in my personal capacity, so like in the street and so on, I try to behave, and honestly, most of the time I behave, and I understand that it's not the automatic behavior of people because people do like one time I was working in Italy with a friend of mine, Italian, and he was wearing kufia. I don't wear any symbols generally, but he's Italian wearing kufia, and a woman came to him, a random old lady, and she told him, All Palestinians should be killed, all of them, they are terrorists. And he told her, even that child, uh, my son, and she said, Yes, also that child, because they're all terrorists. The the I didn't see the TV what they did in October 7th. And I uh my first reaction was like, I wanna just be mad, you know. I just bought all my anger because who she is, like she's just a random person in the street, you know. She made the effort to say this, like it was not a sitting of conversation, and uh luckily, like my friend comes from like this, I don't know, like a spiritual thing where he was listened, he calmed her and he started having conversation, and then he told her, This is the Palestinian and this is his son, I'm not even Palestinian. And then eventually the woman started asking more questions, and and honestly, we can see in that moment that she really changed, she started to understand that the problem is ignorance, is power, is like it's not that child who was a Palestinian, but this is how she was programmed, and this anyway. So I could have just yelled at her, and and that uh something I expect from people in these moments, but I was lucky that I did not go that way. I feel that eventually a very unfortunate situation ended up where there was a smooth conversation, but the woman was really asking questions. And when people ask questions, it means that they're realizing they they have done a mistake.

SPEAKER_00 32:04

Thank you for sharing that. That's really sorry that happened. And I I think that, you know, we said at the at the top, how do we actually humanize people's experiences? And I think you found the strength to do that in that situation um that most people would have been really challenged and probably would have defaulted to a triggered uh response for sure. Daniel, were you gonna jump in?

SPEAKER_03 32:25

It feels like we're we're in couples counseling, humes it. Um, you know, I think for me, for me, that's when I need to double down. I think I I want to understand what's animating that person's emotions. That's really what perspective is about. And I think that's where you can reach the transformative moment of finding common ground with somebody. And I remember on a personal level, you know, I think I sets, you know, I'm I'm critical of the Israeli government, right? I think that kind of goes without saying. And I remember relatively recently, someone I knew from childhood called me a traitor to the Jewish community for doing that, right? And even threatening violence for even just doing something so innocent as sharing a video of an innocent Palestinian child during the ceasefire. And I could have just ignored that as I usually do, but uh I picked up the phone and I called him. And I said, I heard what you said, you know, I want to understand where you're coming from. And I also want you to understand where I'm coming from, why I do the work that I'm doing, and why it's for, in my opinion, for the benefit of our communities to help people really see one another. And I think also, you know, for Hamza and I, you know, by and large, I don't think we have any any really core disagreements. I think one thing that we are trying to navigate together in this moment is what does it mean to be the perfect ally? Or broadly speaking, who is welcome in the tent? And that may be a point of divergence for us because, you know, I understand from a Palestinian perspective, there's been such a lack of people in the Western media who are championing the Palestinian cause, right? And sometimes when you come across a figure who is finally affirming and validating your views, you're you're gonna hold on to that and feel finally seen. Right. But I I also believe that maybe we not every ally is created equally and they could be doing more damage to the cause, then they might be helping us in that moment where they are validating our opinions. And so we're we're thinking through what does allyship look like? Who's welcome in the tent? And not, you know, in a litmus test type of way, because I don't really believe in litmus tests except for, you know, figures that are more liable to cause harm than good.

SPEAKER_00 34:33

Yeah, I think you're both leaning into curiosity in some really challenging moments, and that's really inspiring, at least for me for sure, Eli audience.

SPEAKER_02 34:41

Yeah, well, I'm hoping we can, I mean, like that was amazing. And I think there are a couple of questions in here from a little bit before that we can bring in now and make it sort of even more concrete, like Hamza and your story, especially. So there's a question here about like how do we engage with people who aren't, like in theory, don't have identities that invest them in the conflict or in what's happening in Israel and Palestine in the same kind of way. So, like the random Italian woman that you mentioned, right? Like, how do you talk to that woman? Like, how is it that you actually talk to that person? And I think related to this, because I think these people, these sort of like groups of people often go together, but how do you talk to people, or do you have tips for talking to people who see this in a very binary way? And I think, Daniel, you were getting at that a little bit in your story of like, you're a traitor because you know, like what I heard in your story is like someone perceiving you as a traitor because what you're doing is harmful, and either you're helpful or you're harmful, or like, you know, it's this thing or the this other. So, like, what are one to two tips that you that either of you have or both of you have for either of those situations where someone's either very binary and or a little bit more detached from the situation than you are personally because of the identities that you hold, and how do you talk to those folks?

SPEAKER_01 35:44

So, in the case of this Italian woman, we have to acknowledge that we have limited energy and we have to choose our battles. So I wouldn't never have walked into that woman. For example, with Daniel, I reached out and texted him because honestly, as a Palestinian, he's more important to me than a random person in the street. He's he's a Jewish person, he's American Jewish, he's he cares, he has anxiety about this. So my share of space that I give him is much bigger than someone in the street who who's so uh arrogant and ignorant that she makes such a statement with somebody that she doesn't even know. And we're not in a place where we were debating, she's just in the street. But I had to answer her because it happened, and um eventually um my desire from outside of any human interaction is that I don't make things worse, I don't make harm, and I don't make harm against myself and others and and everyone, and it is possible always. Uh I just tune with the energy of the person in front of me. But if I'm talking with an Israeli, it's not a different game. It's like you always have to adjust your balance and your parameters. But first of all, care about yourself, make sure you are not uh provoked all the time, they're not doing it out of provocation or out of desperation to prove a point. Because remember, every person you talk with eventually they're useless or useful. Uh depends on their attitude in life about information. So don't give it too much, like stay authentic, stay balanced, use this exchange where you have control in the process and the part that you have control of to learn something. Because every person you meet in life does teach you something, even the the um the marketing who come exclusively to sell you something, if you don't fall into his trap and you still engage, you will learn something about maybe the industry or about the techniques of today's of marketing. So really always stay focused on yourself. Don't there are people who do it just to provoke, or the people who just do it without wanting to listen. So if you feel that the other person on the other side is not really doing the minimum to keep the conversation healthy, don't be frustrated. They're just uh conversation that is not holy, is not meant to be, and it's not gonna change anything about your life. So don't feel sorry about it. And really, there are the people who feel uh victorious when they hurt you, confuse you, or make you uh inconfident. Don't let anyone do this to you because there's a lot of complicity sometimes from our side that we allow people to do this to our things as long as we have good intention and we are entering these conversations to learn and teach, it's give and take, also.

SPEAKER_00 38:18

I'm hearing you say like control your energy, right? Like, how can you actually control your energy?

SPEAKER_01 38:22

Yeah, even with people you love, you know, it's it's it's like this is um there's no one solution to every uh profile, but you you learn to recognize the people who are worth your time, who worth that you open also your space because they are fundamental. I mean, an Israeli who is my neighbor, for example, is my neighbor, so I have to expand my who I am to figure it out as much as possible, at least within my control, versus someone who just happened to have no identity or or skin in the game whatsoever, but so unhappy in their life that they want to ruin somebody else's life. It's not the same. Each person is different.

SPEAKER_03 38:58

I think I would just quickly add to that. I think the worst thing that you can do, you know, when you're speaking to somebody, especially somebody that you find disagreeable or saying something that rubs you the wrong way, is to make them feel small and cut them down to size, right? Because I think people's cynicism is often an outgrowth of pain born out of their lived experience. And I I need to understand what's motivating that, you know, and I I know we're gonna maybe touch on this a bit later, but I I've seen that firsthand with my own family. So I try to have as much patience as I can um to maybe find a point of common ground and convergence. On the other hand, I also do think that if we are trying to convince somebody to see the wisdom in our perspective, the worst thing that we can do is come armed with the most clever talking points in our back pocket, right? Hamza and I wrote about this, which is that is the most alienating thing you could do to somebody because right away they recognize you and register you as a diplomat or like a propagandist for your cause. Rather than listening to what you have to say, they're just gonna ignore you because you're you're coming in like a machine um trying to convince somebody.

SPEAKER_00 40:03

Right. Well, and like based on principles of nonviolent communication, if I sense you trying to convince me of something, I'm gonna like my body's gonna flare, mentally I'm gonna shut down. So I think that's right. So I wanna I wanna pull out the part that you were starting to touch on, Daniel. So this idea that do you both feel a responsibility to translate your own community to others or even to itself, like within your own community? And like if you can pull us into what the pressure is like, how do you manage all of that within your respective communities?

SPEAKER_03 40:34

Yeah, you know, I think someone might see my what I would call seemingly oxymoronic clashing identities as a progressive Iranian Jew as a headache to nurse. I see it as a responsibility to be a bridge. It is the work of translation, right? The namesake of this podcast. It's a work of translation, but often lost in translation is that criticism of your own community isn't rooted in malice, right? Or it's it's not gratuitous, but it's rooted in in love. But your communities, especially when they don't see how maybe you know the pains of their past could be repurposed to inflict pain on others. Love really requires holding up a mirror sometimes. And the love for me isn't always felt or returned. But as I said, change really begins when you try to get your own house in order. And for me, that includes the very home that I was raised in. You know, and I I've shared a story before about you know something my mom said to me a while back that has stayed with me. She's proud of the work that I do as a mother, but one that she long ago lost faith in. Lost faith in and really reminds her of the wounds of her past. So as I said, she was born and raised in Iran, but she one day came up to me, she's like, Why do you care so much about them? I live with them. They hate you. Them being Muslims and me being a Jew. And she went on to add that, you know, I I used to be naive just like you. I remember I used to walk when I would leave um Jewish school in Iran, random people in the street would yell dirty Jew at me, and I forgave them. And then I would invite my Muslim friends over my house and they wouldn't touch the food because it was made by Jewish hands. And still I chose to forgive them until the Islamic revolution happened and she was no longer welcome in the home that she was raised in. And then October 7th was really her, I told you so, right? And so for me, here is someone who I, you know, I've held up as the model of compassion and resilience, essentially giving up on the world and confused as to why I've let it go, I've yet to let go of the rope myself. And I believe, like I keep talking about perspective, our elders' lived experiences are not ours to rewrite, but we are also inheritors of that lived experience. So we have the agency to write anew. And I made a decision to break from my mother's cynicism because I wanted to break the cycle. I wanted to, and I still want to. I insist on the possibility of something better, right? Like when we are going out there and doing presentations, how could I be so hypocritical as to stand before audiences and ask them not to define my people, the Jewish people, by their worst representations if I'm gonna be guilty doing the same. So I I need to be fair, honest, and and still strive for something better.

SPEAKER_01 43:28

Yeah, I would add also that you know this conflict has been putting our communities in the sense of mobilization, and uh in the times of mobilization, critical thinking, um go law, the ability to negotiate within the same group get reduced. So we haven't processed uh 1948 or 1967 or like we haven't processed anything in from our history. Um and the same with 911 and everything that happened and this. Is still in the memories of people. Plus, they're always under a mobilization message. So with from within the community, there's a mobilization message from the enemies, there's mobilization message from all the other power groups that are trying to intervene, but also are shaping the conscious conscious. So I always felt that the true identity of Palestinians, at least the Palestinians, but applies on others, is before everything happened. Because everything after this conflict is just a reaction. It's not who we are, it's just who we are under the circumstances. And in order to uh transform the people and change the stories and change the values and change uh what they remember and what they don't remember, we have to clear all this dust that comes from from this conflict over who we are and the stories that we decide to keep. For example, you know, in times of conflict, my family mention awful stories about their experience and the conflict. In times of quiet and peace and stuff, they mention about that soldier who who was different in his group and who was kind and so on. So to remind people that uh you know who they are now is who they are because of the situation, that it's not who they are under balance. Because that who they truly are under balance. For example, when my child uh I have eight years, uh old son, and um we used to live in Palestine, and when he was two, I think, I was in Jerusalem with his mom uh doing um like car registration transfer, and there was an ultra-orthodox woman with her child, and my son and her daughter were playing together because they were still not educated, you know. So when we are not educated, we know the truth. We we know that he he just saw a child and he went to play, and I was I was for me, this is a proof of theory, you know. I was very happy, and her mother like didn't care. But for me, uh it's because of what all subjected on us and others. So we have to have empathy with when others also are losing their mind, that this is not who they are. I mean, if you decide to be a dialogue, a bridge maker, you should also be less fragile than the average people, because we live in also like people are truly fragile, but also we live in a system that profits on the fragility of people, and they want them to be even more fragile. So if hold yourself to higher standards, higher ground, even when you talk with others, and so care if they don't hold, because you have to understand it's not easy, like this world is not easy for many people, and and the story of your mom, uh Daniel, it's uh it is it is hard work and it's part of the truth. Um and if you don't have ritual need to fix it, you say, I mean, I hear it often also from like I meet a lot of uh older Jews, uh American Jews usually, and they they believe that this is what we have now is the normal, is the new normal, and it's gonna be like this forever. This is normal. And uh we have to create this this um higher uh energy that make us believe that it can be better so we can work for better. Despite acknowledging that's not good now, because what I don't like, for example, about liberal politics in general is that it says, yeah, people are already equal, people are already um like if we just do this program or this law fix it. No, things are really bad, and that's why we have to so so like maybe the future descendants of you, Daniel, will not have to face the same problem. Not because this problem never existed, like we don't have to like there's also a need always to not mention the bad things of history. No, let's mention them as uh things to learn from, uh things that we shouldn't repeat. But pretend that the past was always wonderful and so on is also things I think we have to be to feel that we will be safe if we tackle, like it's not the end of the world. We can say sorry sometimes, uh if our ancestors did bad things, I mean it always makes us rise, not not lose in life.

SPEAKER_00 48:01

Yeah, I think that's right. Like the bravery um of looking at history not to um really to learn and to not repeat. And so I think that's really powerful and strong what you're saying. So a question because you said it, is that where the name came from? Like wanting to call the Substack higher ground?

SPEAKER_01 48:17

Yeah, I mean, uh for me, I always thought the problem is not left versus right. I I never believed when I worked uh in in in Palestine and Israel, I never believed that people who label themselves left or progressive were in practice less complicit in the reality than the people who say we are the crazy. So I found in each group that there are just two qualities of people within the liberals, there are people who are really honest and really passionate and so on, and there are people who are just performative or free, free riders, and within the conservatives, within the religious, within the secular. So, what we are talking here about not dividing people across political ideology, come wherever theology you have or non-ideology you have, as long as you are committed to a higher, that you believe there's enough for everyone in this world, that somebody, your neighbor living a totally different way of life, most likely doesn't fit in your way of life at all. And maybe he has something to teach you, and you have something to teach them. But how do you want to arrive to this? Like math, what math taught us is that there's a million ways for the same result. And uh so the ways we are free, we don't we don't know our way actually to influence one's ways on others, but but there's something that's not oh, it's bad or it's gonna be always bad, and it's a competition, and we just need to stay ready to fight all the time.

SPEAKER_00 49:37

So, another question of what do you both see as the line between criticism and dehumanization?

SPEAKER_03 49:44

Well, it's gonna sound self-serving because as a critic, you know, I think criticism is necessary and just because it shows that you know we care so much that we're willing to put a target on our back. And I think obviously we see this now in many countries, the absence of any form of criticism really just invites impunity, which is a gateway to authoritarianism. But where I would say criticism devolves into dehumanization is when our criticism becomes so extreme and absolute that we start losing sight of the other's humanity, right? We're hearing more and more now people who are refusing to engage, like we're doing here, engaging. And war is only heightening that call, right, to cut the cords of communication. And I see and I feel it and I hear it. But peace is rarely forged in you know, the company of people who we agree with or who confirms our biases. Like the ground really begins to shift when we are in conversation with people who challenge our biases, right? So, in this moment where you know ideological dogma is calling on us to boycott others and even our own people, our own community, I think dialogue is the antidote to dehumanization.

SPEAKER_00 51:01

Really powerful.

SPEAKER_01 51:02

It's hard, it's hard for me to accuse somebody who what who is already involved in dialogue to be dehumanizer, because this sometimes enters the heart of people. And I don't want to judge people's hearts, but if we see that um that the this type of people who just uh one-sided criticizing, but they don't want to ever listen, acknowledge. I mean, it's like they're on a mission with like boom, boom, boom, boom, boom. And and regardless of what they criticize, you know, like like even in business, when you uh want to create your innovation, you bring diverse people to avoid the group think, and you allow people to say things in any way they are, and you don't shut up an idea and so on. But but you have somebody who maybe come and has some grievances and try to disrupt the process. And you know, uh so you see it from the intentionality. Of course, some people come with their ignorances and maybe they say things that sound uh um dehumanizing, but to label it dehumanizing, it has to come from somebody also with authority. You know, if if Trump says something dehumanizing, it's actually more dehumanizing than say a taxi driver. Because the power and the audience and it's different. So as long as the conversation is going, we should consider majority of people in both as uh criticism, uh maybe imperfect criticism, but if it's something that uh we we should trust our feelings, that like this sixth sense is there to to feel when and when it's uh somebody with authority, we should call them up. When somebody is not with authority, maybe we shouldn't amplify their voice because you know neglecting them is the best strategy, you know.

SPEAKER_00 52:44

Yeah, no, that's a really interesting point. I don't know ever if I ever thought deeply about the power dynamics um of when we experience something as dehumanizing. So that was really good. Eli, audience questions?

SPEAKER_02 52:54

Yeah, well, I want to bring in something here that's not it's not dehumanization related, but it's related to this question around criticism and a specific piece of criticism and how either the two of you navigate that or how you recommend people out in the world navigate that, because I hear you both saying, you know, talking about people who are well-intentioned in their criticism and bringing sort of respect and tolerance and all the things we would want into the conversation. And this is a question that someone brings that's about, you know, they've seen Jews and progressive non-Jews come together in sort of supporting peace and dignity and safety and opportunity for everybody, but then it sort of hits a snagger, the conversation derails when it comes to the existence of Israel as a Jewish state versus the idea of liberation for Palestinians through dismantling a Jewish state. And I'm curious if that is something that the two of you have navigated, or if you have uh recommendations for how someone might navigate that kind of question, given sort of what you were just talking about, about how you understand criticism generally in this in this conversation.

SPEAKER_01 53:50

I mean, this is a huge topic, and it is kind of also civilizational and ideological and spiritual, but most of our conversations do not go to that level. It is a usual most conversation with people who already want a Jewish state or don't want to enter a Jewish state. And we're what we are discussing about things that happen in our daily life that obviously are wrong and obviously gonna come with a huge price now and for the future. And we have done these mistakes in the past and we don't want to repeat them. So kind of just to keep people within the moment and uh our shared experience now and the nearer future of how we wanna minimize the damage, how we want to avoid problems, how we wanna weaken uh individuals from our communities who are doing damage in the name of everyone. But if it comes to such a deep question, I don't recommend discussing it just purely as it is, because it can mean anything. Somebody can say, I don't want a Jewish state because I don't believe in states. It's different than somebody who says I don't want a Jewish state because Jews are evil and should not have a state. It's totally different, totally different philosophies, totally different stance, and totally different persons, and totally so we I recommend in these moments, and sometimes I do it when I'm not sure that the person's intentions is, because this could be something wonderful what they are saying. Sometimes, like people say, Arab young people, I meet that why you want a state? Like all the states in the world are horribly oppressive to their own citizens and so on. Maybe you guys are happy, just you should look maybe for safety and for okay. This is fine. This somebody is not denying my principal right for a state, but you could because I'm Palestinian, he's telling me, dude, it's not as fancy as you think, for example. But there's somebody who says, No, you are barbaric people, which happened to me also, you are barbaric, and barbaric people should not be given a state. And then I want to state just because I want to show them that actually we're not barbaric, you know.

SPEAKER_03 55:41

I'll just quickly add that, you know, and with the caveat of what Hamza was saying about not knowing what's inspiring that question or you know, the intentions behind somebody who says that, it does remind me of what we always talk about at Project Shema, which is rejecting the binary, right? I to me it's it's sounding like a false choice of can I support Jewish sovereignty at the same time I support or seek Palestinian liberation and sovereignty. And uh, you know, it's so often, and I think you know, this is something that benefits status quo, that status quo beneficiaries are perpetuating, which is the idea that these two concepts are mutually exclusive and irreconcilable. And I don't think so. I don't believe in that. And that's also why, you know, we talk so much about pro-this, pro that. I think we would all do ourselves uh a service if we reject the pro-prefix, because if I say I'm pro-Israel, for example, then it implies that I'm anti-Palestinian or vice versa, which in this moment we need to be both or pro-both. And I would argue that, you know, what is in the best interest of the Israelis or Israel is also in the best interest of Palestinians and Palestine and vice versa.

SPEAKER_00 56:44

That's um, thank you both, because I I think there's an element that you're both naming of both like how a how a conversation can be highly ideological. What are we actually talking about? And the the power and the need to actually clarify and verify what are we actually getting at? And how do we keep those grounded in this is not actually a choice between this or that. There's a huge spectrum of where we can land on these issues. And for those of you here listening to, like this idea of not being afraid, right? Like in a dialogue, you can start to sort those things out. You can start to understand more of what people mean on a human-to-human level at a relational way that you can have a dialogue that hopefully we're demonstrating today too. Other questions, Eli, that came in?

SPEAKER_02 57:28

Sure. So there's a couple of like, I don't want to get too much into politics and current events, and I want to be mindful that you both are, as we sort of said at the beginning, are not representatives of your communities at large. And there are a couple of more like politics current event things that I want to at least bring in here. So one is related to the current conflict between Israel and Iran and the US and Iran, and just if you if you have a sense that of just sort of like what's happening for you or for communities that you are a part of as a part of that. And I think the other thing, which is more related to the more recent Israel-Gaza war specifically, but I think is worth exploring, is that um sort of the sense that during times of conflict, there's a lot of media rallying support and empathy for Palestinians as victims. And then after the war, that tends to sort of dry up and there's not really the same investment in Palestinian rebuilding. And I'm curious to get your responses to that as well. So if you have thoughts on either Iran or the question of sort of the role that Palestinians play in the media or the role that the media, how the media utilizes Palestinians to tell stories of victimhood and rebuilding.

SPEAKER_03 58:34

Yeah, um, I'll obviously take the first part um about Iran. You know, I think I'm sitting at an obviously an interesting intersection because of my Iranian and Jewish identity. And, you know, I observe what my community is feeling in this moment, which to be honest, there is a lot of anxious hope and rallying support behind this war from both a purely Iranian pillar and a Jewish pillar, because the two converge because obviously they have a mutual tormentor in the Islamic Republic. And so, for many people in my family and community, they see this as finally like overdue payback for the people responsible for literally uprooting their life. And that's for both Iranians in general, including uh Muslims and Jews in the diaspora. And I've even heard a lot of reports about people on the ground who are supporting the war for the same reasons. I have different views, you know. Like, of course, I'm not in any way upset about Khamenei losing his life, but uh where I become a little bit nervous, if you will, for lack of better words, is there's no strategy. And I'm being, I've said this before, like, we're being asked to place our faith in the hands of two people who have by no means earned that trust in Donald Trump and Benjamin Netanyahu. So um it is it is a very complicated moment with many mixed emotions.

SPEAKER_01 59:57

Yeah, I agree. Also, my family happened to live in in the region. Uh already a sharbin of um of rocket fell in my uncle house. Uh luckily no one was injured. There's no siren systems, there's no air defense, there's uh nothing. And uh because, in my view, there was no successful war since 1967. I mean, all the wars that happened in the region, even that has this had nothing to do with, uh, eventually somehow they just emerged in a worse situation, like Saudi Arabia and the Yemenis and everywhere basically. So I was sure that even with higher equality leaders in the better times, they failed. These two are gonna fail even if it's easy to win, and they're gonna create uh a highly destabilized region because unfortunately the Arab states, and I have studied this uh within my studies, are very unresilient comparing to Iran and in the long-term conflict, then they they're gonna be weaker, emerge weaker. So it is uh a war that hyped on uh so much um confidence, and as a principle, in words, uh confidence uh leads you to defeats. So I was I was already uh against this war since a long time, and now I'm even more worried about it. And uh I really hope somehow they close it as soon as possible because the longer it takes, it might become like Gaza. Um that after two years you discover you're gonna reach the same deal that you could have reached um a year and a half before. So just waste of time and blood and everything. And um the other question about the global support, um, and that's my private uh opinion. I think people do not, majority of people, especially non-Arabs and non-Muslims, and especially non-Arabs and Muslims who are not elite, it is for them um just the Palestinian card, just a proof of um of their general ideological stance. So if they are leftist against a conservative or opposition, they use this card to shame their enemies locally. And even what sometimes I felt within the Jewish communities, like some branches want to shame other branches, and the Palestinian cause is uh a card, an evidence about their general bigger theory about life. And it's not really it's not really ultraistic, like super for the Palestinians, because when I look about donations, the 80% of donations that arrive to Gaza arrive from poor Arabs, not from rich Arabs, from poor from from like poor middle class Saudis and Jordanians, and not like the rich ones, and definitely not the the the celebrities in the West and the famous names, and um because uh it is part of the disease we have. I mean, there are a lot of people who speak about uh noble causes, but out of performance, out of uh, or because it is a supplementary card within the bigger project. Um, and especially when I went to universities and students protested, it was not against me. It was me, what I'm saying, weaken their political message or something, that they're anti-colonial or whatever, or anti-capitalism. Uh, and and I I come to speak uh as people who as somebody who wants to bring protection to his people. I like these fights, um it's a luxury fight, it's a fight for some people who don't have my problem. But they see me as a part of their project. They're not allowing me to use them for the protection of my people. They use me for the advancement of their it could be a good cause, you know. But because of this power structure, we're weak. We're more gonna be used. And I believe also the Jewish communities around the world, because they're they're smaller, they're minority, they are vulnerable to be used more by people even who claim to speak for them. But when it comes to delivering protection, delivering uh no, they just use you and and go, which is something uh uh, you know, with all the protesting and and everything that people did, that's why I continue to have conversations and dialogue, even though that's a much sexier um activism for me. Uh, because I know it doesn't translate to to things. I mean, I'm I'm people doing it is still a healthy thing because it's uh energy that has to be expressed. And if it's not expressed, it can go to dangerous things, to more violent and more but I always remind them that this is not enough that they wear Kofiya or raise the flag.

SPEAKER_00 1:04:29

Thank you both for that. And I'm wondering, what would you say is the most important lessons you've learned by doing this engaging and dialogue across difference? And I guess into the ways that we can, what can we all walk away with as far as some of the lessons that you've learned in doing this work together?

SPEAKER_03 1:04:47

You know, I realized one thing, which and this goes even this predates October 7th, but it's been really underscored ever since October 7th, which is that the media does such a good job of magnifying the extremes on both sides, which really distorts our perception of where most people are in real life. And um, it really also makes us think that peace is just an illusion that can never be reached. And we have so much that is standing in between us when that's not true. And I realize that from the work that we do at Project Shema, going into different communities and speaking. And what it has taught me is that most people are showing up and most people want to have conversation. They're not as ideologically dogmatic as we think, they're not rigid. That yes, they may ask difficult questions, and that's okay. I think we also have to give people the latitude to say the wrong thing, even if uh, especially if it's well-intentioned, because none of us are subject matter experts, and this is the most complicated and emotionally charged issue. But people are really trying to approach this um this topic in good faith and learn from one another. And so I uh for me, I've learned that the majority of people are really in what I would say, for lack of better words, like the sane majority that are trying their best. to build a better future.

SPEAKER_01 1:06:02

Yeah, I I agree. You know, confirming to this, when when I used to spend a lot of time in Israel, um with my work, I worked a lot in Tel Aviv. And my work team was, you know, intellectuals, you know, people elite. But also when I go and spend time with taxi drivers, with uh workers in restaurants who do not have this luxury to say things perfectly. But they they saw they said the most heartwarming things to me more than all the beautiful things I heard from people who speak perfectly. That's why because I listened without judgment. Their message was that they want to have peace with me. Maybe they messed up how they said it. Because the majority of people are not professionally doing this. I remember once having a conversation with a Jewish guy also in California and I told him you man you have to think and he told me listen I have three loans and I have family and I have jobs to ask me to think is not as simple as you think. And it was an eye-opening that yeah you know I have the luxury to spend two hours thinking about something I saw on social media because I don't uh I don't have this uh burden in my life and some people don't so we have to to take um also we have to take the entire cause outside religious and political uh divisions you don't need to be uh with any identity to believe in peace I believe all identities that we know exist now I mean not small cults that I don't know about uh you can be a member of this and also be a person who doesn't want to waste money on wars and blood doesn't want their children to live for for for failed projects whatever these failed projects and if this means that we have to talk with them in religious language why not? I treat religions uh as philosophies of life like there's capitalism there's Islam or this one version of Islam and one version all of them try to create some balance for humanity. Also I'm fluid in terms of ideology I I I often um hear from activists that yeah but we are left that you are left doesn't give you a special certificate that you are a good person in life. Judge if there's somebody who identifies as right and you see that you can coexist with him in work and you can maybe it's a work whatever then try to even the conversation use this terminology don't be so sure that our our your way I mean I'm sure that my way is the right way but when I treat with people I'm not sure like also when my private space okay my own apartment my way is I want to live my own way as if it's the only way or the right way. But in life people also have the right to know their way and uh seriously we're often suffering in our mind more than our reality and um and the all these things came after October 7th because before October 7th we had the playbook and it was if you bring two people and you do this activity and if we don't think about the past and we don't talk about religion and we just see how our similarities and then peace will happen. And it's kind of also the globalization of market everyone will have jobs and everyone all these things collapse. So now we are free to allow others also to say their way to peace or their way to coexistence and if we agree with people 30% mention it. I agree with this person 30% don't say zero because there's no way that you're living with somebody who didn't kill you and you already and you don't agree at any percentage with them. That's our position.

SPEAKER_00 1:09:25

That's not the reality that's you know I'm I'm definitely walking away with the idea of what you've said like right left forget like how do we actually go above how can we have a different type of conversation exactly as you're naming we're so quick to name difference. What does it mean to name the things that we agree on to lean into the things that we agree on as a starting point which I think both of you have modeled so well both in your writing in your conversation today. So just thank you thank you so much. Thank you everyone for joining us today. Just a few closing notes. So you heard at the beginning this conversation is part of a launch for our new podcast translations you're getting a bit of a pre-launch preview today. This recording will become an episode so again find us on Apple Podcasts Spotify wherever and however you listen download like subscribe the rest of the world will not be getting this launch information until next week so surprise and we're going to create space to dive really deep into the hardest conversations with the goal of really helping people unpack and translate across difference in this podcast and we hope that you find it valuable. We're also launching a new offering called Beyond the Binary, which is Project Shema's Dialogue Across Difference program. Much like you saw today, this is a powerful opportunity to witness so if you're interested in hosting a similar conversation where speakers model dialogue and share practical tools for navigating complexity you can follow this QR code on your screen and submit your information. You can also indicate if you're generally interested in broader anti-Semitism education, skills building training programs for Jewish stakeholders or support just addressing tensions within your organization or organizations that you're working with. And I also want to close by something that we named at the very beginning that what you heard today was not consensus. It wasn't presentation of entire communities it was how two individuals share their personal experiences and perspectives and stay in dialogue across real difference. And our hope is that conversations like this create just a little bit more permission, offer more of a model for others to do the same within your own community. So truly truly thank you thank you to Hamza and Daniel for your courage for your honesty for your willingness to engage in this way you really are helping set a different example of what this can look like in community. So we like truly truly can't thank you enough for your time.

SPEAKER_03 1:11:55

Thank you and thank you Aban