203 Winter 2011: Debate

Response

Michael Brull

Perhaps the most astonishing thing in Tietze’s essay is his dismissal of ‘a naïve adherence to secularism as a progressive force in the modern world’. It reminds me of Emma Goldman’s meeting with Lenin, during which he informed her that ‘free speech … is, of course, a bourgeois notion’.

Read 'Response'

203 Winter 2011: Debate

Michael Brull versus Tad Tietze, ′That political Islam is not a friend of the Left′

Affirmative

Michael Brull

The Left should be firmly and unapologetically secularist. The Left, rightly in my view, has historically stood for classical Enlightenment values of rationalism. We should support people thinking for themselves, rather than believing in irrational and empirically dubious dogmas. We should support people challenging undeserving authorities, rather than offering them deference or outright obedience.

Read 'Michael Brull versus Tad Tietze, ′That political Islam is not a friend of the Left′'

Print Issue 198 Autumn 2010: Features

But what about Zionism?

Responding to Ned Curthoys and Dennis Altman

Michael Brull

In the dispute between Curthoys and Altman over responses to Zionism, I sympathise with both positions, albeit with reservations. On the one hand, Altman’s seems more moderate and cautious. Yet he dismisses calls for a boycott of Israel. To me, this is unreasonable. I agree that the campaign for boycotts, divestments and sanctions (BDS) is likely to be ineffective in the struggle for Palestinian rights, and I have argued this at length elsewhere.

Read 'But what about Zionism?'