> Well, no. I was talking about Americans, not Palestinians. I think it's rather odd that Americans can get all excited about BDS'ing Israel when our own country not only makes Israel possible, it commits many horrors on its own. The invasion of Iraq, for example, probably killed more than a million people. I'm reminded of a great post that James Heartfield wrote early in this list's life about how people in imperial metropoles get very excited about denouncing sub-imperialisms - the example that inspired that was China's treatment of Tibet.
>
For what it's worth, I take a somewhat more nuanced line. On the one hand, I agree that there's an odd disconnect between the enthusiasm in certain sectors about BDS'ing Israel and the many other targets of opportunity closer to home. On the other hand, I think as a practical matter, BDS activities can be very useful, by giving activists something to do, and precisely by generating pressure on the *US* govt: Ultimately US support for Israel is dependent on popular acquiescence to the notion that Israel is a worthy beneficiary and boycotts are a very *visible* way of hammering on the theme that it's not.
On the third hand, all of these objectives can be satisfied with BDS of *US* (or other) firms with investments in Israel or that do business with the Israeli mil-ind complex, so I can't understand why there's a need to target Marks and Spencer, a campaign that really does creep me out. Finally, if there's one rationale that does *not* trump anything it's that some number of Palestinian groups are calling for BSD. There may be a duty to stand with your own society's victims, but there's no obligation to slavishly adopt their political analysis. The ultimate objective of a solidarity campaign (if it's ever to work) is to change politics in the *US*, and I don't see how Palestinian groups are better placed to judge various tactics on that front.
SA