When Ed Sheeran played the victim card after the Macklemore fallout, he did what all Israel appeasers do: he pretended genocide is too complicated to understand.
Yes, these principles are violated constantly. But I think that is precisely why it matters that we continue to insist upon them.
You started by arguing that collective punishment is simply how international politics sometimes works. You pointed to Germany, to Gaza, and now to the prevalence of atrocities around the world.
But there is a danger in that reasoning. When “people do this all the time” becomes our answer to an atrocity, we begin normalizing the atrocity instead of opposing it.
Article 33 does not say collective punishment is prohibited only when the world is behaving itself. It prohibits it precisely because history demonstrated what happens when we accept collective guilt and the punishment of civilians as ordinary features of war.
Laws are only as meaningful as our willingness to uphold them.
It requires more than writing them down.
It requires the willingness to condemn violations where they occur, when they occur; friend or foe.
We must confront the scale of the destruction Israel has inflicted across Gaza. More than 170,000 structures, roughly 69 percent of Gaza’s prewar buildings, had already been damaged or destroyed by January 2025.
We should confront the conclusion reached by the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry after examining the broader pattern of killing, deprivation, destruction, displacement, and official conduct: that Israel has committed genocide in Gaza.
“Power concedes nothing without a demand. It never did and it never will.” - Frederick Douglass
Do not look at the frequency with which these principles are violated and conclude that resistance to them is futile. Draw the opposite conclusion.
Their violation is the reason we have to keep insisting upon them.
Demand better. Do not concede what is right simply because others have.
Now that is a defensible argument.
Yes, these principles are violated constantly. But I think that is precisely why it matters that we continue to insist upon them.
You started by arguing that collective punishment is simply how international politics sometimes works. You pointed to Germany, to Gaza, and now to the prevalence of atrocities around the world.
But there is a danger in that reasoning. When “people do this all the time” becomes our answer to an atrocity, we begin normalizing the atrocity instead of opposing it.
Article 33 does not say collective punishment is prohibited only when the world is behaving itself. It prohibits it precisely because history demonstrated what happens when we accept collective guilt and the punishment of civilians as ordinary features of war.
Laws are only as meaningful as our willingness to uphold them.
It requires more than writing them down.
It requires the willingness to condemn violations where they occur, when they occur; friend or foe.
We must confront the scale of the destruction Israel has inflicted across Gaza. More than 170,000 structures, roughly 69 percent of Gaza’s prewar buildings, had already been damaged or destroyed by January 2025.
We should confront the conclusion reached by the UN Independent International Commission of Inquiry after examining the broader pattern of killing, deprivation, destruction, displacement, and official conduct: that Israel has committed genocide in Gaza.
Do not look at the frequency with which these principles are violated and conclude that resistance to them is futile. Draw the opposite conclusion.
Their violation is the reason we have to keep insisting upon them.
Demand better. Do not concede what is right simply because others have.