Solidarity Shouldn't Look Like This

Like many of you, I woke up this morning to the horrible news of a mass shooting at a Channukah celebration in Sydney, Australia.

Like many of you, I also quickly saw footage of a man who threw himself at one of the gunmen and successfully disarmed him, saving countless lives.

I've seen countless posts lauding this man, Ahmed al Ahmed, as a hero and a model for what solidarity should look like between Jews and Muslims or Arabs.

Ahmed is absolutely a hero. But he is most certainly not my model for what solidarity should look like.

Solidarity should not look like men throwing themselves at active shooters.

Solidarity should not look like people putting their bodies in front of government thugs trying to impose a racist ban on a minority religion or ethnicity.

Solidarity should not look like synagogues and mosques swapping strategies regarding how to "harden the target".

Solidarity should not look like a taxi driver evacuating terrified survivors from the scene of an ongoing massacre.

Solidarity should not look like desperately working the phones to try and rescue a family buried under the rubble of their own house after it was hit by a tank shell.

Solidarity shouldn't look like that, because none of those things should happen.

You want to know what my model of solidarity is?

It's a new arrival in town asking where they can find Halal food, and being pointed to the excellent Kosher market down the street.

It's two neighbors snickering over the well-meaning lady next door who somehow gives a different wrong pronunciation of both of their names, every time.

It's the synagogue and the mosque sharing a parking lot.

It's bonding over the common elements of shared cuisine, and bonding over trying unfamiliar elements of different cuisine.

I understand why, in the wake of unfathomable tragedy, a story like Ahmed's provides a flicker of hope in a dark time. And make no mistake - he is a hero. But I don't want more Ahmed al Ahmeds because I don't want more situations where that sort of heroism is required. It is a tragedy that our vision of solidarity -- of ideal solidarity -- is tempered through atrocities that never should happen in the first place. That should be a depressing thought. The subtext -- elevating Ahmed's story and the narrative of solidarity as a hedge against those who wish to inspire an Islamophobic and racist backlash -- is also depressing. I'm not saying it isn't necessary or it's wrong -- I'm saying it's depressing, and our model of solidarity should envision something that is greater precisely because it is more mundane.

The solidarity we should aspire to is not the extraordinary work of extraordinary individuals in times of crisis. It is rather the ordinary, everyday work of making friends, creating love, building connections, being neighborly. No crisis, just communities enmeshed in bonds of caring.

That's what solidarity should look like.

AI Über Adderall

Another day, another AI hallucination story -- this time involving mega-consulting firm Deloitte, which just refunded a big chunk of change to the Australian government after a report they did was found to contain inaccurate and likely hallucinated citations.

Every time I see one of these stories, I always am left asking "Why? Why did you do it?" The risks have to be well-known at this point. And getting caught seems like it's close to career suicide. What's happening?

404 Media did an interesting interview with attorneys who had been caught using AI (and who failed to catch AI hallucinations), and the general theme (aside from "a subordinate did it and I didn't check") was some variation on being overworked and under a ton of pressure.

Now, perhaps I'm overthinking this. But I am wondering if there's some interplay between the historic hard-charging atmosphere of the big consulting firms and use of AI. Companies like Deloitte have a bit of a reputation vis-a-vis their work culture, which basically boils down to "if you are willing to be worked to death, we'll make you richer than God." Younger hires, in particular, are hit with truly unfathomable workloads and time pressures (with sometimes predictably tragic consequences). The historic implicit expectation, if one was in such a situation, was basically to wink at "drink your coffee, take an Adderall, stay up all night, bang it out." I have to assume the work product generated in such circumstances was not always outstanding, but it was at least a human employee's substandard, bleary-eyed work product.

But imagine it's 2025 and you're in that impossible Kobayashi Maru situation. Instead of using Adderall as your crutch, doesn't AI feel a lot more attractive? If we throw out any sort of professional concern about putting out good work product -- and in the imagined situation, there's no way not to; actually performing to expectation is functionally impossible -- then why not roll the dice with AI? The work is going to be bad either way, but at least you can (literally) sleep at night. 

I don't know -- it's just a theory, and I have no evidence that this is going on. But it doesn't seem implausible, no? Maybe another sector AI is disrupting is the ability to "rely" on overcaffeinated and drugged up twenty-somethings to kill themselves on consulting assignments to squeeze a few more dollars out of the bottom line.

Australian Police: They Were Saying "Boo-Urns"

One of the more shocking incidents witnessed in anti-Israel protests that occurred immediately following Hamas' October 7 attack was the allegation that marchers in Sydney chanted "gas the Jews". But while several witnesses testified to hearing the chant, local police have now determined that they do not believe those were the words that were spoken.

Now, before I tell you what the police concluded was the chant actually deployed that day, I want to share a couple of reactions to this finding:

The Australian Federation of Islamic Councils called for prosecutions of those who disseminated "false claims" that had unfairly vilified Palestinians and Muslims and harmed the "delicate fabric" of social cohesion.

[....] 

Protest organiser Palestine Action Group, which long maintained the "gas" chant was never uttered, called for widespread media retractions. 

Spokesman Josh Lees suggested the wrongly captioned video was designed to damage the movement, pointing to "a long history of false claims of anti-Semitism used to silence critics of the state of Israel".

Strong stuff! Now here's what the police concluded was being chanted:

They "concluded with overwhelming certainty that the words used were, 'Where's the Jews?'" Deputy Commissioner Mal Lanyon said on Friday.

Ohhhh. It was only "where's the Jews?"! I can see why the organizers are demanding an apology -- it's getting to the point where an angry mob can't demand to know where the Jews are without someone saying that's antisemitic (rolls eyes). The only offensive thing I see here is the poor grammar!

For what it's worth, the umbrella Australian Jewish Association stands by its initial conclusion that the chant was indeed "gas the Jews."

It's Impossible To Be Antisemitic, Part 2246

Hey, remember that time an Australian theater refused to allow a (non-Israel-related) Jewish group to put on performances commemorating the Holocaust because the theater thought it would be incompatible with their opposition to Israel? Now, an Australian mayor declined to attend a ceremonial synagogue service because of "the gross and illegal occupation of the West Bank which creates intense international division and bitterness and, unresolved, will cause endless terrorism around the globe, including here."

Think he's antisemitic? Wrong! Always wrong!

“Many people hold very strong views about, in this case the occupation of the West Bank. Many people who are indeed Jewish do so, and I am myself half-Jewish. To infer from a view about occupation that someone is anti-Jewish…it’s just ridiculous,” [Mosman Mayor Peter] Abelson said.

One almost might think that attendance at a non-Israel related Jewish event in Australia could be meaningfully distinguished from one's views about the occupation of the West Bank. Of course, one might have also thought that firebombing a synagogue could be meaningfully distinguished from one's views about Israeli military campaigns in Gaza. Alas.

The Train Still Has No Brakes

An Australian branch of Hillel asked a Sydney theater if it could put on a series of performances related to the Holocaust. The theater responded thus:

“Our policy does not support ­colonialism/Zionism. Therefore we do not host groups that support the colonisation and occu­pation of Palestine.”

Of course, the shows had nothing to do with either "colonialism" or "Zionism" (and, not to put a fine point on it, but unless this theater is run by Aboriginal Australians there might be something to say about specks and logs here). And the group clarified that it is "apolitical" but supports the creation of a Palestinian state (I did a quick perusal of Hillel's website -- I don't know if they're affiliated with Hillel International -- but found no substantive discussion of issues regarding Israel). It didn't matter.

It was a Jewish group that was putting on a performance regarding Jewish history. And for some, that's too much. The train has no brakes.

Practical Solutions

Check out this event being held at the National Conference for the Australian Labor Party this year:

Labor Party and union members in Australia, looking for progressive solutions to support peace, justice and reconciliation for Palestine and Israel , will hold a break through Fringe Event at the 2009 National Conference of the Australian Labor Party in Sydney later this month.

The event is being sponsored by the Australian Workers’ Union with the support of the Maritime Union of Australia.

Ambassador Izzat Abdulhadi, the head of the Palestinian general delegation in Canberra, will be a key speaker at the ALP Fringe Event.

The ALP Fringe Event is being held at the Australian National Maritime Museum theatre on Thursday July 30, 2009, at 5.30pm.

It is open to all National Conference delegates, ALP members and supporters.

The National Secretary of the Australian Workers’ Union, Paul Howes will chair the panel discussion at the Fringe Event, which brings together, for the first time, key agenda setters in this debate in Australia.

Paul Howes, as a founding Executive member of Trade Unions Linking Israel and Palestine (TULIP), is looking for constructive alternatives to the Boycott, Divestment and Sanctions (BDS) movement which has undermined trust building between unions on both sides of the Green Line.

This event – which is expected to attract a huge and diverse crowd – will be opened by Paddy Crumlin, National Secretary of the Maritime Union of Australia.

The MUA leader will show a short video, produced by the International Transport Workers Federation, about a joint Palestine-Israel trade union project bringing together Palestinian and Israeli transport union leaders.

This is a pace setting example of co-operation between the two national union centres – other projects involving Israeli and Palestinian construction unions are now under active discussion.
Panel participants

The panel discussion will involve:

* Ambassador Izzat Abdul Hadi, head of the Palestinian general delegation in Canberra

* Robert Goot, President of the Executive Council of Australian Jewry

* Michael Danby, Federal Labor MP and an active member of Parliamentary Friends of Israel

* Janelle Saffin, Federal Labor MP and an active member of Parliamentary Friends of Palestine
[...]
After questions from the floor Mike Salah, current president of the Australian Palestinian Professionals Association (APPA ), will make some comments about the way forward for activists in the Australian labour movement, from an Australian-Palestinian perspective.

Isn't this great? Joint Jewish/Palestinian participation. A genuine commitment to dialogue. A focus on practical efforts to secure peace and reconciliation.

What a fabulous event. Great kudos to both the ALP and TULIP, and all other supporting bodies, for helping put it together.